Tom Brady along with the National Football League Player's Association are currently in a federal lawsuit in a U.S. District Court against the National Football League.  The case centers on the appropriate use of power by the NFL commissioner to act as labor arbitrator, but is that really what it is about? How did the loss of a small amount of air in a few footballs balloon into a federal case?   Attorney James M. Lynch of Stevenson, Lynch & Owens, P.C. recently wrote an excellent post outlining the legal arguments that both sides have, and why, in his opinion, Brady has the stronger case:  Brady Federal Deflategate Appeal: A Lawyer’s View .   As a lawyer, I found the analysis intriguing, but as a mediator, I wonder if the legal analysis of this case misses the point. Tom Brady isn't in court to stand up for labor unions.  The fans and the public don't care that much about whether Roger Goodell's decision was consistent with the "practices of industr...

In Massachusetts, the asset division statute (M.G.L. c. 208 s 34), grants the court significant discretion and authority to assign assets owned by one spouse to the other in a divorce case in order to reach an "equitable" division.  The trial court has broad discretion as to the treatment of all types of assets owned by either spouse, but before the court can determine an equitable division, the assets themselves must first be defined and valued.  With many assets the value is straightforward, and there are accepted ways of valuing real estate, personal property and business interests.  But some assets, such as stock options, are very difficult to value reliably. What happens when the value of a marital asset is uncertain? The Appeals Court, in Canisius v. Morgenstern , addressed this question in regards to potential royalties and movie rights for the author of The Night Circus .  The trial court Judge had excluded future income from the sale of the wife's book f...

Collaborative Law is a practice that requires finding the right balance in many different ways.  The goal of the Collaborative process is to reach agreements through negotiation and to avoid the expensive and emotional experience of Court.  Clients and their counsel must find a balance between individual advocacy and shared goals in order to reach solutions.  Finding this balance can sometimes be difficult and challenging, but also rewarding. Kayaking is a great metaphor for collaborative practice, because it also requires balance and work in order to have a rewarding experience.  On Thursday, July 23, 2014 some members of the Massachusetts Collaborative Law Council decided to bring the metaphor to life by joining each other for a summer afternoon of kayaking at Lake Cochituate in Natick.  Here are some pictures from the event: If you have a dispute, ask yourself if you want professionals handling your case that can't get along? ...

The Massachusetts Appeals Court has decided another case interpreting   the Alimony Reform Act , that I will likely refer to as that "length of the marriage" case rather than trying to pronounce the actual name.  In Valaskatgis v. Valaskatgis , the Appeals Court was faced with the question of whether the Alimony Reform Act's definition for "length of the marriage" also applied to property division questions. Question:  Does Length of the Marriage (for Alimony)   =   Length of the Marriage (for Property Division)? Answer:   No. Why does it matter? The Alimony Reform Act defines length of the marriage as: "the number of months from the date of legal marriage to the date of service of a complaint or petition for divorce or separate support duly filed in a court of the commonwealth or another court with jurisdiction to terminate the marriage; provided, however, that the court may increase the length of the marriage if there is evidence that t...