High Stakes or Handshakes? Understanding ADR in Michigan
If you’re involved in a civil lawsuit in Michigan—whether it's a personal injury case, business dispute, or other civil matter—you may encounter terms like case evaluation and facilitation. These are both forms of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), which aim to resolve cases outside of a full-blown trial. But despite their similarities, they’re not the same. Knowing the difference could help you better understand the legal process and your options for settlement.
Here’s what you need to know.
What Is Case Evaluation?
Case evaluation is a formal, court-ordered process used in many Michigan civil cases, especially in personal injury and tort matters. It’s governed by Michigan Court Rule 2.403.
In case evaluation, a panel of three attorneys—usually experienced in the relevant area of law—reviews written summaries and sometimes oral arguments from both parties. After considering the facts, they assign a dollar value to the case: an amount they believe represents a fair settlement.
Key points about case evaluation:
It’s mandatory in many types of cases.
The panel’s number is not a suggestion—it’s an award.
If a party rejects the award and does worse at trial (by a certain margin), they may be responsible for sanctions, including the other side’s costs and attorney fees.
The process is often rigid and focused more on valuation than negotiation.
Bottom line: Case evaluation is high-stakes. It’s not about finding common ground—it’s about putting a number on the case, and rejecting it comes with risk.
What Is Facilitation?
Facilitation is a form of mediation that involves a neutral third party—called the facilitator—who helps both sides negotiate a settlement. Facilitation is typically voluntary but may be court-ordered in some counties. It’s more flexible and tailored to the dynamics of the particular dispute.
Key points about facilitation:
The facilitator is usually a seasoned attorney or retired judge.
It’s an informal, confidential process.
Parties are encouraged to talk openly about strengths, weaknesses, and potential compromise.
There’s no binding award unless both sides agree to settle.
Facilitation can happen before or after case evaluation.
Bottom line: Facilitation is collaborative and designed to promote settlement through guided negotiation. Unlike case evaluation, there's no risk of sanctions for walking away.
Which One Is Better?
It depends. Case evaluation can be helpful when both sides need a reality check on the value of a case, but it’s adversarial and rigid. Facilitation, on the other hand, is ideal when both parties are open to compromise and want to avoid the risk and expense of trial without the pressure of potential sanctions.
In many cases, we recommend doing both—using facilitation to see if a deal can be reached early, and case evaluation as a fallback or leverage point.
Final Thoughts
If you’re involved in a civil lawsuit in Michigan, it’s important to understand every stage of the process—and how tools like case evaluation and facilitation can affect your case.
Attorney Paul Shkreli has extensive experience in this regard. First, he has seen countless cases through the ADR process as the handling attorney. He’s also been a court-appointed case evaluator or sought-after facilitator on hundreds of cases on issues of civil liability and damages. Whether you’re preparing for ADR or seeking a highly qualified mediator, we can guide you every step of the way.
Contact us today to schedule your mediation
