Dallas Arbitration Lawyer | Bennett Legal

Somewhere in the fine print of a contract you signed, there's a clause that says you gave up your right to sue. Most people don't find that clause until they need it — and by then, the other side already knows exactly how it reads.

We recently took a case all the way to a $2.5 million arbitration award against Amazon — proof that an arbitration clause doesn't mean the deck is stacked against you, if the case is built right.

If you're facing a dispute that's headed to arbitration, call (972) 972-4969 or fill out our free case evaluation form today. The rules are different from a courtroom — you need someone who knows them before your first filing.

Arbitration differs from litigation in several key ways. While litigation involves taking a dispute to court and having a judge or jury decide, arbitration occurs outside the formal courtroom setting. Instead of a judge or jury, an arbitrator reviews the evidence and decides.

One significant difference is that arbitration is a consensual process, meaning both parties must agree to participate. Litigation, on the other hand, can be initiated unilaterally by one party, which can lead to adversarial proceedings. Arbitration allows parties more control over the process, since they can select the arbitrator and agree on the arbitration rules. However, there are times when arbitration is mandated ahead of time by the contract. This contract governs the relationship between the two parties.

Another difference is that arbitration provides a more private and confidential setting compared to litigation. Court proceedings are generally open to the public, while arbitration hearings can be conducted in a more discrete manner. This confidentiality can be particularly appealing in sensitive and high-profile cases.

In a court case, the public will know the decision and many of the filings in the case. Even if the arbitration result is public, it will generally take place in private and with less media coverage.

For a full side-by-side comparison of your options, see our mediation vs. arbitration vs. litigation guide.

Arbitration offers several advantages over traditional litigation, making it an attractive option for resolving legal disputes. Some of the key benefits include:

Efficiency: The arbitration process is typically faster than litigation, allowing parties to reach a resolution more quickly. This can save time, money, and resources.

Cost-Effectiveness: Arbitration can be more cost-effective compared to litigation. The streamlined process, shorter timelines, and limited discovery proceedings can help minimize legal fees and expenses.

Limitation on Discovery: One or both parties may have an interest in keeping the scope of discovery limited because of the time and expense involved in the matter. While there is often some discovery allowed in arbitration, the scope may be limited.

Experience: Parties have the opportunity to select an arbitrator with experience in the subject matter of the dispute. This ensures that the decision-maker has a deep understanding of the issues involved. Generally, you can select an arbitrator from a list provided by the governing arbitration body.

Flexibility and Control: Unlike litigation, arbitration allows parties to have more control over the process. They can choose the arbitrator, agree on the arbitration rules, and determine the timeline for resolution.

Confidentiality: Arbitration hearings are often confidential, protecting the privacy of the parties involved. This can be particularly important in cases where sensitive information or trade secrets are involved.

Enforceability: Arbitration awards are generally easier to enforce compared to court judgments. The New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards provides a framework for enforcing arbitration awards in over 160 countries.

However, there are times that litigation may be in your best interests. You may want a more robust type of discovery that you would not have in arbitration. You may also prefer having a jury decide your case because there is a chance that they can order a higher amount of punitive damages (it is possible to receive punitive damages in arbitration, but an arbitrator may be less likely to order them, and the amount can be less). Your arbitration attorney may advise you that there is a better chance of winning your case in front of a jury, especially when you are able to receive more discovery than you would in an arbitrated proceeding.

By choosing arbitration over litigation, parties can benefit from these advantages and have a more efficient and tailored dispute resolution process. However, the exact determination depends on the facts and circumstances of your situation.

If you’ve heard conflicting information about arbitration, our guide busting common arbitration myths separates fact from fiction.

Whether you can be compelled to arbitrate your case depends on various factors, including the nature of the dispute and the agreements between the parties involved. In some cases, parties may have entered into a contract that includes an arbitration clause, which requires them to resolve disputes through arbitration.

If there is a clause in an agreement requiring arbitration, chances are that it will be enforced. Time and again, courts have been called upon in matters involving the enforceability of arbitration clauses. Usually, they reach the result that there is valid public policy which favors arbitration, and courts will uphold the clause. Even if you want to go to court, you will not be able to if you have agreed to arbitration in advance of any dispute.

If there is no contractual agreement to arbitrate, it may still be possible to voluntarily agree to arbitration after a dispute arises. Both parties must agree to participate in the arbitration process for it to proceed. However, determining the enforceability of arbitration agreements can be complex, and it is advisable to consult with an arbitration attorney to assess your specific circumstances.

Before you sign anything, review our list of red flags in unfair arbitration clauses.