“Lawyers choosing final arbitration over a federal jury’s decision because they assume it may be more efficient and less costly are often incorrect in their assumption.” Cuker v. Berezofsky, 2019 WL 689592 (E.D.Pa. 2019) at 9.

Unfortunately, disputes among lawyers and their law firms are relatively common. Resulting claims sometimes lead to a civil action and some are subject to mediation and arbitration. Today, from our experience, most law firm agreements include alternate dispute resolution provisions which include some combination of mandatory mediation and/or arbitration. These provisions are set forth in the law firm’s partnership agreement and control the scope and nature of the arbitration. Sometimes, there is a question concerning the scope of the arbitration provision and whether certain claims are arbitrable and others are not. Often these disagreements are complex and themselves, independent of the merits, can be difficult, time consuming, and expensive to resolve.

‘Morelli v. Alters’

This content has been archived.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

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]