Delay: A Hidden Cost of Going to Trial

Going through a divorce is emotionally challenging if not downright unpleasant. Therefore, it is not surprising that a person going through a divorce wants the case to be over as fast as possible. Unfortunately, going to trial is generally not the way to get a speedy resolution of a divorce case because so many divorce cases get delayed for some of the following reasons:


1. No matter how set in stone a trial date appears to be, at least in Superior Court in Anchorage, if an emergency children’s proceeding is filed, it trumps the divorce trial, which means then the judge assigned to the divorce case, has to reschedule for a later date.


2. Even if a trial starts on the scheduled date, it is not unusual for there to be delays in the middle of a trial because of court matters over which the trial judge does not have any control over such as emergency children’s hearings. Therefore, it is not uncommon for a case to be tried a day here and a day there over a course of several weeks and in rare cases over the course of several months.


3. Judges do not usually make a decision at the conclusion of a trial. They take the matter under advisement. It is not unusual for the judge to take four to six months before he/she issues a written decision.


4. Once the judge issues a written decision, each side has the right to file an appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court. Although this generally does not affect the finality of the judge’s decision, the appellate process can take two years. If the Alaska Supreme Court reverses the trial court’s decision, the case is usually sent back to the trial judge for further court proceedings.


Because delay is one of the risks of going to trial, settling a case through mediation or a settlement conference with a judge is certainly an attractive alternative to spending months and possibly years embroiled in divorce litigation.  The day you settle you can begin to look forward to the rest of your life.  Why wait?


Academy of Family Mediators

Alternatives To The Traditional Divorce Case

A divorce is processed through the court system like any other civil case. Both spouses retain attorneys to represent them. One spouse, the “plaintiff,” files a complaint for divorce against the other spouse, the “defendant” who then files an answer to the complaint. The case is assigned to a superior court judge on a random basis. Judges certainly encourage attorneys and their clients to work cooperatively. But the court process is based upon an adversarial system, which pits the parties against each other as each attorney argues in favor of the client’s position. Consequently, divorce litigation is financially draining because of the amount of time and legal fees involved. It is emotionally draining, particularly since it is almost impossible for an attorney to give a client the peace of mind of knowing how the judge is going to rule on the points of contention between the parties.

Fortunately, there are alternatives to the adversarial court case. These alternatives seek to build a consensus between the parties on issues related to property, custody, and support. The first alternative is mediation. In divorce mediation, a neutral third party works with you and your spouse to identify issues on which you do not agree and to assist you and your spouse in coming to an agreement on all financial and child-related divorce issues. The neutral third party cannot give advice to either of you so it is quite common for each spouse to have an attorney present at mediation sessions. 

The second alternative is the collaborative law process. Unlike mediation, the collaborative law process does not involve a neutral third party. Instead, you and your spouse each hire an attorney whose role is to assist you in going through each step of the collaborative process to come to an agreement on all divorce issues without going to court. The attorneys may bring other collaborative professionals including coaches, child specialists, and financial planners into the process for guidance and information. 

You can learn more about the differences between the traditional court case, mediation, and the collaborative practice from the Comparison Of Divorce Options chart, created by Conneticut attorney Harold Brienes.