LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS W. DREXLER

LITIGATION: The term litigation essentially refers to the court process. When a lawsuit is filed, and the other side opposes some or all of the relief sought in the case, the lawsuit is contested and the parties are in LITIGATION. The case will generally continue in court until the matter is resolved by motion, settlement, or trial.

We bring lawsuits on behalf of our clients, as well as defend our clients when lawsuits are brought against them

Usually one of the most expensive aspects of litigation is the DISCOVERY process. Discovery is pre-trial investigation undertaken through the court process. Typical discovery frequently includes: 1) Interrogatories to the opposing party (written questions to be responded to under oath) ; 2) Requests for documents related to the litigation from the opposing party; and 3) Depositions of the other party and their employees if any (oral questions and answers under oath). In addition, by issuing a subpoena, you can obtain the same types of discovery from other people and entities that are not parties to the lawsuit.

When presented with a client's situation, we try to accomplish the best possible result. In some cases, where a relativelly small amount of money is involved, it may not make sense to have a costly court battle. In other instances, lawsuits are the most the most effective and thereby the best recourse. Decisions to settle matters or to proceed with litigation are made only after careful consideration of the client's situation and after discussion of relevant factors with the client.

One has to be careful to make sure that their attorney has their best interests at heart. The perils and pitfalls of court proceedings have been the subject of many works of literature over the years. A famous example of litigation run amok is found in Charles Dickens' novel Bleak House. He writes about the fictional chancery case of Jarndyce and Jarndyce. The case concerns the fate of a large inheritance, but has dragged on for many years, so that, by the time it is resolved late in the novel, legal costs have devoured nearly the entire estate. The case is thus a byword for an interminable legal proceeding, and a small excerpt follows here:

From the first chapter: Jarndyce and Jarndyce drones on. This scarecrow of a suit has, in course of time, become so complicated that no man alive knows what it means. The parties to it understand it least, but it has been observed that no two Chancery lawyers can talk about it for five minutes without coming to a total disagreement as to all the premises. Innumerable children have been born into the cause; innumerable old people have died out of it. Scores of persons have deliriously found themselves made parties in Jarndyce and Jarndyce without knowing how or why; whole families have inherited legendary hatreds with the suit. The little plaintiff or defendant who was promised a new rocking-horse when Jarndyce and Jarndyce should be settled has grown up, possessed himself of a real horse, and trotted away into the other world. Fair wards of court have faded into mothers and grandmothers; a long procession of Chancellors has come in and gone out; the legion of bills in the suit have been transformed into mere bills of mortality; there are not three Jarndyces left upon the earth perhaps since old Tom Jarndyce in despair blew his brains out at a coffee-house in Chancery Lane; but Jarndyce and Jarndyce still drags its dreary length before the court, perennially hopeless. (Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jarndyce_and_Jarndyce).

I've been in practice over twenty years, and have a different philosophy as to how litigation should be conducted. It is my client's interest that I represent, and it is important to focus on what the main issues are, the results desired, and not allow litigation of a lawsuit on behalf of a plaintiff to totally consume the expected benefit of being there.

Similarly, representing a defendant or respondent, one needs to focus on the best and least expensive course of resolution.

For illustrative purposes, consider the legend following:

The Gordian Knot:

According to legend, an oracle at Telmissus, the ancient capital of Phrygia (now part of the modern country known as Turkey), decreed to the Phrygians, who found themselves temporarily without a legitimate king, that the next man to enter the city driving an ox-cart should become their king. Midas, a poor peasant, happened to drive into town with his father Gordias and his mother, riding on his father's ox-cart. Midas was declared a king by the priests. In gratitude, he dedicated his father's ox-cart to the Phrygian god Sabazios (known to the Greeks as Zeus) and tied it to a post with an intricate knot of bark. The knot became known as the Gordian Knot, and it was further prophesied by an oracle that the one to untie the knot would become the king of Asia.

For over a hundred years, the knot remained, no one being able to untie it. The ox-cart still stood in the palace of the former kings of Phrygia when Alexander the Great arrived in 333 BC. Alexander attempted to untie the knot. When he could find no end to the knot, to unbind it, he sliced it in half with a stroke of his sword, declaring "It is thus I unravel the Gordian Knot" (the so-called "Alexandrian solution"). Alexander went on to conquer Asia, fulfilling the prophecy.

Where possible, I like to use the Alexandrian solution to litigation, just cut through all layers of complication to get to resolution.