Mediation & Arbitration

What's the difference between mediation and arbitration?

They're often confused but work very differently. In mediation, a neutral mediator helps the parties negotiate their own settlement; the mediator has no power to decide anything, so any resolution is voluntary. In arbitration, a neutral arbitrator hears the case and issues a binding decision, much like a private judge. Mediation is about reaching agreement; arbitration is about getting a decision. Many disputes use both in sequence, mediating first and arbitrating only if that fails. We represent clients in either and advise on which fits a given dispute.

My contract has an arbitration clause. Do I have to arbitrate?

Usually, but not always. Courts enforce valid arbitration agreements under the Federal Arbitration Act and Washington's Uniform Arbitration Act (RCW 7.04A), and a party that sues in court despite a binding clause can be ordered into arbitration. But whether a particular claim falls within the clause, and whether the clause is enforceable at all, are real questions that get litigated. We assess whether your dispute truly must be arbitrated, move to compel or to stay court proceedings when arbitration is required, and challenge arbitration when the agreement doesn't actually reach the claim.

Can I appeal an arbitration award I think is wrong?

Rarely, and that surprises people. An arbitration award is binding, and a court can vacate it only on narrow grounds, such as corruption, fraud, evident partiality of the arbitrator, or the arbitrator exceeding their authority, not simply because you believe the arbitrator misjudged the law or the facts (RCW 7.04A.230). That limited review is the trade-off for arbitration's speed and finality. It's also why the hearing itself is so important: the realistic chance to win is there, not afterward. We do pursue and defend the challenges the law allows where the grounds genuinely exist.

Is arbitration better than a lawsuit?

It depends on the dispute, because arbitration trades some cost for speed, privacy, and finality. Arbitration usually moves quicker than a crowded court docket, keeps the matter confidential, and gives the parties more control over scheduling and the decision-maker. But the parties pay the arbitrator and the administering organization, and complex arbitrations can run up real costs, so arbitration is often faster and more private than a lawsuit without being cheaper. You also give up the right to appeal almost entirely, which is a real cost if the award goes against you. We assess that trade for your matter rather than assuming arbitration is automatically better or worse.

Should our contracts include an arbitration clause?

It depends on what you value in a future dispute. An arbitration clause can give you privacy, speed, and a knowledgeable decision-maker, which many businesses prefer, but it also limits appeals and can complicate bringing or consolidating related claims. The clause's specific terms, the scope, the rules, the forum, the cost allocation, matter as much as the decision to include one. We draft arbitration provisions tailored to how you'd actually want a dispute handled, rather than dropping in boilerplate that may not serve you when a conflict arises.

Do I need a lawyer for arbitration?

You're not required to have one, but arbitration is adversarial and the award is usually final, so going in alone against a represented opponent is a real disadvantage. Arbitration has its own procedural rules, its own limits on discovery, and its own rules about what evidence the arbitrator will hear, and none of that is intuitive. Because review of an award is so narrow, the case has to be built correctly from the start, with little room to fix it later. The same is true of mediation, where preparation drives the outcome and walking in knowing your real position and the other side's is most of the work. And if there's a threshold question about whether a dispute even belongs in arbitration, that often has to be raised early or risk being waived.