Dispute Resolution

Dispute Resolution

SERVING THE LEGAL NEEDS OF CONSTRUCTION WORKERS SINCE 2010

free consultation →

Dispute Resolution | Designed and Built For Your Success

Alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”) has its advantages and disadvantages. At Grogan Hesse & Uditsky, P.C. (GHU), our Chicago construction lawyers have seen ADR at its best and worst. It is important when you first enter into a construction contract that you know what you’ve agreed to and why. Often, ADR restrictions can seriously limit your options to lien or pursue your claims for payment. Each project should be analyzed separately and we can help you negotiate the best option for your circumstances.  
 
If you find yourself already bound by an ADR provision, GHU can help you navigate through it. The two primary ADR methods employed in construction disputes are mediation and arbitration. GHU has wide experience with both.
contact us →

Mediation

Construction mediation is a process by which parties select a neutral third-party who attempts to bridge differences between the two perspectives in the hope of reaching a compromise to resolve the parties differences.
 
The American Arbitration Association (AAA) and other private ADR providers have lengthy rosters of trained neutral mediators, usually attorneys or retired judges, who also have specialized knowledge or backgrounds in construction matters. Many construction contracts containing mediation or arbitration provisions specifically name AAA as the provider of ADR services, along with an agreement to use the rules and procedures established by the AAA for construction disputes. 
 
In most mediations, all parties meet with the mediator and explain their respective positions before meeting individually with the mediator. These discussions are confidential, allowing the parties to speak freely. The mediator will then engage in “shuttle diplomacy,” going back and forth to share demands, terms, arguments, and concerns until the parties reach an agreement. All parties will then sign a document reflecting the mediated settlement, which is treated as a binding contract. If the parties can’t settle, or if a party breaches a settlement agreement, they may continue their dispute through litigation.

Arbitration

Arbitration shares more similarities with litigation and is more formal than mediation. The third-party neutral arbitrator reviews evidence and hears arguments from counsel and testimony from witnesses. Parties may also engage in discovery prior to the arbitration hearing as they do in litigation. Though the rules of evidence and procedure are typically less stringent than at a trial, often the rules are similar to that of a case tried in a court of law.
 
Arbitration can be either binding or non-binding. In the former, the parties agree to abide by the decision of the arbitrator as if it was a judge’s ruling, while in the latter a party may choose to reject the arbitrator’s findings and conclusions and proceed with litigation if they desire. Unfortunately, if the arbitrator makes a mistake, it is nearly impossible to overturn his/her decision.

Arrange For a Free Consultation With One of Our Chicago Construction Lawyers Today

All of the potential advantages of ADR depend on having counsel who know the rules, know construction, and know how to build the most compelling case. At GHU, our ability to develop and implement effective ADR strategies gives our construction industry clients an advantage when conflicts arise, positioning them for cost-effective resolutions that protect their finances, operations, and reputation. 

If you anticipate or are currently involved in a construction-related dispute, we invite you to arrange a free consultation with one of the Chicago construction attorneys at Grogan, Hesse & Uditsky, call us at (630) 833-5533 or reach out to us online to arrange for your free initial consultation. 
630.833.5533
Share by: