Technology Is Changing the World of Dispute Resolution
Mediated disputes increasingly call for technologically savvy mediators who can both understand the technical aspects of the issues and relate to the parties.
September 16, 2017 at 12:02 AM
5 minute read
Think back just 10 years ago. You were taking grainy pictures with your flip phone and, if you were trendy, you were posting in your MySpace account. Even if you had TiVo, you still had to wait at least a week to watch each episode of your favorite show. In just the last decade, the iPhone was introduced, Facebook went public, and ecommerce overtook retail. You can now binge-watch your favorite show at any hour of the day or night, get a private car service in seconds and have food or consumer goods delivered on demand. Drones are delivering packages and cars are starting to drive themselves.
Technology is advancing at rapid speeds, and it is impacting every industry. Even old school industries, like construction, are becoming technical with laser scanning and building information modeling. Gone are the days of tape measures. Now contractors are digitally capturing dimensions and spatial relationships using laser technology. You can walk through your virtual building and make changes before it is even constructed. The professional services industry is seeing similar advancements. Process automation is becoming the norm. Robots are now performing basic accounting functions and preparing tax returns. Our era now has voice-powered personal assistants and autonomously powered self-driving vehicles.
The business world has rapidly embraced technology, and with advances in technology come more sophisticated disputes. We frequently see disputes over cybersecurity, privacy, information breaches, malware, stolen identities, application and software development and other technologies. Because these cases are complex, often requiring forensic analysis and expert testimony, litigation costs are significant. Thus, companies are frequently including alternative dispute resolution provisions in their agreements to mitigate costs and improve efficiency. They often look to mediation as an initial step in resolving their problems.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllA Judge Ordered Squabbling Lawyers to Have Lunch: Here's What Happened
Plaintiffs' Attorneys Reach Settlement Agreement With City of Atlanta, Requiring ADA-Compliant Sidewalks
A 'Gotcha Tactic'?: Court of Appeals to Hear 'Bad Faith' Settlement Claim Dispute at Oral Argument
Trending Stories
- 1Legaltech Rundown: McDermott Will & Emery Invests $10 million in The LegalTech Fund, LexisNexis Releases Conversational Search for Nexis+ AI, and More
- 2The TikTokification of the Courtroom
- 3New Jersey’s Arbitration Appeal Deadline—A Call for Clarity
- 4Law Firms Look to Gen Z for AI Skills, as 'Data Becomes the Oil of Legal'
- 55th Circuit Strikes Down Law Barring Handgun Sales to Adults Under 21
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250