Joshua Wertzel's recent article (Litigating Through the Coronavirus Crisis: How to Keep Your Cases Moving While the World Battles a Pandemic) is well-taken. In addition to the guidelines suggested by Mr. Wurtzel, attorneys should turn to Alternative Dispute Resolution to address the consequences of courthouse closures. ADR and technology can provide an efficient and cost-effective mechanism for carrying on the practice of law in the age of courthouse closures and shelter-in-place directives.

Mediation and arbitration have long been utilized to resolve civil disputes in a non-emergent traditional ADR milieu. Attorneys and litigants should understand that in this new age of courthouse closures a neutral may also be retained in less traditional, limited purpose, perhaps emergency, engagements. In these times, a neutral may be engaged to assist in the resolution of emergency discovery disputes, supervising depositions and addressing dispositive motions on framed issues. A properly crafted arbitration clause may also include procedures for appeal from or challenge to the decision and award outside the context of Article 75. The utility of ADR for assisting counsel is limited only by the willingness of counsel to craft an agreement to set the boundaries of the arbitration. In compliance with the Governor's PAUSE directive, all of this can be accomplished by video conferences or hearings. As Mr. Wurtzel urges: Don't sit on the sideline, be proactive and think outside the box.

Peter B. Skelos

Former Associate Justice, Appellate Division, Second Department, Nassau

Neutral, NAM (National Arbitration and Mediation)