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This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 AllPlaintiffs' 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
Arbitrability of Sexual Harassment and Sexual Discrimination Cases: Litigating in an Alternative Universe
Trending Stories
- 1On the Move and After Hours: Goldberg Segalla, Faegre Drinker, Pashman Stein
- 2Recent FTC Cases Against Auto Dealers Suggest Regulators Are Keeping Foot on Accelerator
- 3‘Not A Kindergarten Teacher’: Judge Blasts Keller Postman, Jenner & Block, in Mass Arb Dispute
- 4A&O Shearman, Hogan Lovells and the Stories That Shaped Africa This Year
- 5Borden Ladner Gervais Cyber Expert Warns of AI-Boosted Ransomware Attacks
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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