Navigating the Litigation Maze

In the complex world of civil litigation, the journey from demand to resolution can take various paths. While many anticipate the dramatic courtroom trials depicted in popular media, the reality is that the vast majority of cases never make it that far.

Our legal system is designed to provide a fair and efficient resolution to disputes. However, the sheer volume of cases, combined with the cost of litigations, has led to a system where trials are the exception rather than the rule. In fact, a significant percentage of cases are resolved outside of court, avoiding the lengthy and costly trial process. Settlements outside of court can be reached through direct negotiation, through facilitated negotiations in mediation, or sometimes through arbitration. These pathways provide a middle ground for resolving conflicts.

These pathways are generally available to resolve cases after the case has been filed, but another reason why most cases don’t make it to trial is found in pretrial motions. Prior to reaching trial, either party may file pretrial motions seeking a judgment without going through the entire trial process. If a judge determines that there is insufficient evidence or that the case should be dismissed for legal reasons, it may never go to trial.

While the idea of a courtroom trial captures the public's imagination, the reality is that the majority of legal cases find resolution through other means. These are just a few of the mechanisms that contribute to the efficiency of the legal system. As society continues to grapple with the challenges of an overloaded judicial system, exploring and implementing alternative dispute resolution methods becomes increasingly important. By understanding the factors that influence trial frequency, we can work towards a legal system that is both fair and effective in delivering justice.