The Hybridization of Arbitrations

18 months ago, practically all of our arbitrations were live and in-person. it’s better to get a feeling for the witnesses and their credibility, we said. It’s easier to handle exhibits, the lawyers said. It’s more court-like, the parties said.

9 months ago, practically all of our arbitrations were done online, via Zoom or Teams or WebEx. It’s more efficient and requires less travel time, we said. It allows us greater flexibility, the lawyers said. I don’t even have to leave my house, the parties said.

Well, now that the restrictions associated with pandemic are easing up (and before the restrictions get re-implemented, thanks to the low-vaccination rate and the spread of the Delta variant), we’re beginning to see a hybrid form of arbitrations emerge — one where some of the participants attend via Zoom (I mean, face it, we took the verb “zoom” and turned into a noun (“I’m doing a Zoom!”) and then turned it back into a verb "(I’m Zooming this hearing!”)) and some of the participants attend in-person.

And it’s working well…

In a recent article in the American Bar Association Journal, attorney Ashley Brown wrote about her experience in a hybrid arbitration. Much of the procedural nuances were agreed to by the parties. Two parties attended remotely to avoid traveling. One expert witness testified via prerecorded video. Closing arguments were held later, after the parties had received the hearing transcripts and had the time to fully digest everything. It was, in sum, far more efficient. And efficient means less costly. As the author noted, “it is possible to have the best of both worlds: an in-person proceeding for those who prefer it and a virtual proceeding for those who, for one reason or another, are either unable or unwilling to attend the hearing in person.”

Consider it for your next arbitration.

To read the article, click here.