1.  Why you, as a client, are better off using a collaborative law approach.

A.  Litigation uses up - rather than creates - the things being fought over.  If you are fighting over money, after the litigation process is over there will be less money left over to be divided.  Sometimes litigation is so expensive that one of the parties can win a complete victory and still end up with less than they would have had if they had negotiated a settlement.

B.  Litigation is very slow.  Even winning is like a tortured eternity.

C.  You have better things to look forward to.  Litigation focuses your energy - not to mention your money - on the past, not the future.

D.  Even if you want to make the other bitch/bastard suffer, litigation usually doesn't work to do it.  (Never mind that a collaborative lawyer won't help you out if all you want to do is inflict pain on he other side of the case - and never mind that if the Judge figures out that you are using his/her time and courtroom to try and inflict pain, they will figure out a way to make sure that the arrow goes through you on the way to your enemy.

E.  You have more control and regardless of whether the other side is happy or not - you are more likely to be happy with the outcome.
 

A.  Participating Members of the Advocates Collaborative Law Network are all experienced trial lawyers - not paralegal wannabe's.  They know what is relevant, how to gather and present evidence and do all the things that are necessary to present and argue a case in Court.  When they agree to assist a client in the collaborative law process, they don't leave what they know on the door step.  They realize that the law still must be followed and that thorough and comprehensive preparation is the best way to avoid having the collaborative process break down.  After all, what the judge is likely to decide, if the collaborative process breaks down, is still the standard under which collaborative law functions.

B.  Under the collaborative agreement that both parties and both attorneys enter into, if collaborative principles fail to bring about a resolution acceptable to both parties, the attorneys must withdraw from representation in favor of successor counsel.  However, all the work they did - and the insights they gained - are passed along to trial counsel to be used in the litigation.  The collaborative law commitment means that the first attorney steps aside, and the client bears some added expenses as a result - but trial counsel doesn't pay for the same work twice.
 

A.  Litigation is about dividing things, not creating things.  It is a 'zero sum' game:  every dollar someone wins, someone else loses.

B.  Litigation is a 'tax on the problem.'  The problem is bad enough, inefficient ugliness in dealing with it usually makes it worse, even for the winner.

C.  After the people who are hurt get over the pain, they usually realize that the chance of really winning at litigation is too slim to fool with.  Playing the lottery because it is fun to dream about quitting your job with a flourish and retiring to the South of France is one thing.  Actually quitting and buying the plane ticket before the lottery winner is announced is another.

D.  Advocates Collaborative Law Network Participating attorneys aren't in the business of selling the false hope of winning a litigation jackpot as a way of selling their services to the hurt or hopeful.  Their very presence in the network means that they practice law to solve problems and help people, not make problems last as long as the client can keep paying by suggesting that victory is "just around the corner."

E.  The collaborative law agreement forces those who feel wronged or hurt to face the reality that the courts dispense civil judgment, not moral justice.

F.  The collaborative law agreement encourages both sides to focus on the solution, not the problem.  The parties already have a problem - and the solution is within their creative grasp.

G.  Most people - whether they are in a divorce or other civil dispute - want to get it over with, not make it last.  Collaborative law has the benefit of efficiency in  terms of both speed and cost.
 

The Advocates Collaborative Law Multidisciplinary Network is a self selected group of independent professionals who are proud to be linked with the other members.  We do not say - nor do we imply - that attorneys who are not members are somehow lesser or case less about their clients.  We only say who we are, what we believe and why we are members.

We know the law is the servant of society and that lawyers - as individuals - are as different from each other as are the members of the society lawyers serve.  Most lawyers want to do what is right - as they see right to be.  And most lawyers need to make a living in a society that thinks lawyers generally should be the butt of late night television jokes.
 

All participating members of the Advocates network are licensed and practicing attorneys.

All  participating members have an established law practice in Wisconsin.
 

We believe that quality service to our clients begins with listening to their concerns and understanding them as individuals, not as carrier vehicles for legal fees.

We believe that it is better for our clients that the solutions to their legal problems come from them as opposed to having those solutions handed down from the Court.
 

We are comfortable with the idea that other participating member attorneys will have the same attitudes and beliefs about the role of lawyers and the law as we do.

We know that the other participating members will do their best for their clients and that they will honor both the letter and the spirit of their word in doing so.

We know we can refer someone to another member of the network and not be disappointed by the level or quality of the professional services that person receives.

Because being members allows us to be better professionals.
 

A.  Knowing something in the back of your mind is one thing, putting your name to it is something else.  The collaborative law agreement requires both sides and their attorneys to 'put their money where their mouth is'.

B.  Collaborative law seeks to resolve problems by

• Breaking them down into their simplest component parts
• Putting these parts in some kind of order
• Dealing with them one at a time.

C.  Collaborative law practitioners work toward solutions - not toward a climatic fight.  They see solving part of a problem as a small victory on the road to a complete solution.

Click here for links to other Collaborative Law websites

---