Image courtesy of Michal Marcol / freedigitalphotos.net

Parties involved in eminent domain disputes often learn the hard way why mediating might be preferable to litigating in these types of clashes.  When litigating a condemnation dispute, the cost of discovery requests, assessment of fair market value and other outside resources often end up costing more than anticipated, leaving everyone involved at a fiscal loss.  Added to that are the costs of time, as these types of disputes can take months—if not years—to get from start to finish in a congested court system when litigating.

Mediation, however, usually ends up being a much smoother process when attempting to resolve eminent domain disputes.  Eminent domain mediation allows all disputants to come together and discuss a settlement in the presence of a neutral, third-party mediator who has extensive experience in settling condemnation claims.  This mediator will not be biased toward one side or another, but will assist the parties in reaching a mutually beneficial settlement that is within their own control rather than the control of a judge and jury.

Through careful consideration, the intent of eminent domain mediation—and often, its result—is to resolve the dispute in a way that saves everyone involved time and money.  A settlement is legally binding and if a settlement isn’t reached, the claim can always be later tried in a court of law or taken through other alternative dispute resolution processes, like arbitration.

Eminent domain mediation is a cost-saving alternative that should be the first choice of anyone involved in an eminent domain dispute.  More often than not, these cases are sent to mandatory mediation first by the courts—that’s how enormously effective mediation can be in resolving eminent domain claims.  Courts across the country have recognized that sometimes “talking it out” can be a more effective approach than being told what to do by a judge or jury.