Schlam Stone Litigation Partners Launch Same-Day Arbitration Business
The partners, Erik Groothuis and Jonathan Mazer, believe the venture can become a go-to alternative for small businesses that might otherwise abandon—or never bring—smaller-amount commercial claims that are viewed as too costly to litigate in light of the expected recovery.
April 03, 2019 at 10:16 AM
4 minute read
Aiming to solve the problem of small businesses dropping smaller-amount commercial contract disputes because of the expense of litigation, two Schlam Stone & Dolan partners have launched a one-day arbitration business called the Same-Day Justice Program.
The partners, Erik Groothuis and Jonathan Mazer, believe the venture can become a go-to alternative for small businesses that might otherwise abandon—or never bring—commercial claims for small sums, such as those targeting service providers or vendors that have allegedly failed to provide on-time services or deliver sufficient-quality merchandise.
Groothuis is a 20-year commercial litigator at Schlam Stone, a boutique litigation firm in Manhattan. He said he came up with the arbitration idea last November after years of watching smaller clients give up on legal claims—often against service providers and vendors—because the litigation process and its costs outweighed any hoped-for recovery.
“Too many companies walk away from a valid claim in a contract dispute,” he said in a news release issued Tuesday on the same-day program.
In a phone interview Tuesday evening, Groothuis said he thinks “there is an underserved part of the market” for arbitrated resolution of business disputes. He also noted that one-day arbitrations would be unique. He's not heard of one-day turnarounds, he said, and most commercial arbitrations last months. The Same-Day Justice Program, he also said, will aim to primarily tackle commercial disputes valued between $50,000 and $500,000.
Moreover, Groothuis said that he and Mazer believe the same-day arbitrations will become a new avenue of business for commercial practitioners who would otherwise represent an aggrieved business but who turn down the client because the amount claimed is too low relative to their legal fees.
The business venture, which is currently being run through the Schlam Stone firm but that is expected be spun off into a separate entity—and which is yet to have its first clients—is set up to operate about as cost-effectively as could be designed, Groothuis maintains.
Two businesses stuck in elongated and expensive litigation can opt for the Same-Day Justice Program to resolve the dispute, Groothuis said. Or, its use can be agreed to beforehand and made part of a contract's alternative dispute resolution clause. (The same-day program's website, launched at the start of this year, provides example ADR language to be used.)
Once both parties agree to use the program, either Mazer, a veteran trial lawyer with years of arbitration and mediation experience, or litigator Groothuis, will handle the arbitration in a day, they said.
The parties will pay a flat fee for a half-day or full day of private, neutral arbitration, said Groothuis and Mazer in the news release. Then the arbitration hearing will take place in person—unless the parties agree to handling it remotely—and it will typically be held in Schlam Stone's offices.
The parties will bring all of their evidence—documents and witnesses—to the hearing. And before that date they will exchange the documents they intend to use, as well as a list of the witnesses they'll call, the news release explained.
At the hearing, the parties can present their case in any manner they choose, whether by narrative or in question-and-answer format, added Groothuis and Mazer.
The same-day arbitrator will issue a written decision that day, and—as agreed to beforehand—the decision will be enforceable in court.
Groothuis also noted in the news release that he thinks the one-day alternative is “particularly appropriate for companies in real estate, construction, wholesale, retail and other B-to-B sectors.”
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 AllAs Second Trump Administration Approaches, Businesses Brace for Sweeping Changes to Immigration Policy
As 'Red Hot' 2024 for Legal Industry Comes to Close, Leaders Reflect and Share Expectations for Next Year
7 minute read'So Many Firms' Have Yet to Announce Associate Bonuses, Underlining Big Law's Uneven Approach
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 2Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 3'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 4Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
- 5As a New Year Dawns, the Value of Florida’s Revised Mediation Laws Comes Into Greater Focus
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