top of page
  • Writer's picturePat Pegan

Alternative Dispute Resolution Methods in Massachusetts Personal Injury Cases

Updated: Jun 4

This is the first in a 3- part blog post about alternative dispute resolutions in Massachusetts personal injury cases.

Handshake at the end of a negotiation

When it comes to personal injury cases in Massachusetts, the journey toward resolution often takes a different path than a traditional courtroom trial. In fact, the majority of personal injury cases never make it to trial, as parties frequently seek alternatives to reach a settlement. In this series of articles, I will explore three common alternative dispute resolution methods used in Massachusetts personal injury cases: negotiation, arbitration, and mediation, beginning with negotiation. These approaches, which involve skilled attorneys and offer opportunities for resolving disputes outside the court system, provide viable options for parties seeking efficient and satisfactory outcomes.


Negotiation is a process of discussion and compromise between two or more parties involved in a dispute, such as settling personal injury claims, outside the court system. It involves direct communication and decision-making with the goal of reaching a mutually acceptable agreement. Settlement talks almost always begin with negotiation, as it is the

The following are steps typically taken in the negotiation process for personal injury claims after a demand has been made by the injured party:

Preparation: Each party gathers relevant information and assesses their position. This may include reviewing medical records, calculating damages, and consulting with legal advisors to understand their rights and potential outcomes.

Demand: The parties engage in an initial exchange of information and positions. The injured party submits a demand to the insurance company or liable party. In it, they present their case, articulate their interests, and discuss their desired outcomes. This may involve sharing medical reports, accident details, witness statements, and other relevant evidence.

Information sharing and exploration: The parties engage in discussions to exchange information and explore the underlying issues and interests.

Proposal and counterproposal: The parties make offers and counteroffers to advance the negotiation. They may propose different settlement amounts, terms, or other conditions to find common ground and bridge the gap between their positions. They may adjust their demands, make concessions, and explore creative options to address each party's concerns.

Bargaining and compromise: The parties engage in further discussions, aiming to find mutually agreeable solutions through compromise.

Agreement and settlement: If the parties reach a consensus, they formalize the agreement in writing, detailing the terms and conditions of the settlement. This settlement agreement is voluntarily signed by the parties and is legally binding.

Pros of negotiation:

  1. Control and autonomy: Negotiation allows the parties to have direct control over the outcome, enabling them to actively participate in shaping the settlement.

  2. Cost-effective: Negotiation generally incurs lower costs compared to formal litigation, as it avoids extensive court fees, attorney fees, and other expenses associated with a trial.

  3. Flexibility: Negotiation provides flexibility in terms of timing, process, and potential solutions. The parties have the freedom to explore various options and tailor a settlement that meets their specific needs.

  4. Preservation of relationships: Negotiation focuses on finding mutually beneficial solutions, which can help preserve relationships and enable ongoing interactions if necessary, especially in personal injury claims where ongoing interactions may be required.

  5. Confidentiality: Negotiation discussions and settlement terms can be kept confidential, allowing the parties to maintain privacy and avoid public exposure.

Cons of negotiation:

  1. Power imbalances: Negotiation may be challenging if there is a significant power imbalance between the parties, as one side may have more leverage or resources.

  2. Potential impasse: Parties may reach an impasse or deadlock if they are unable to find common ground or make concessions, which can hinder the progress of the negotiation.

  3. Limited legal recourse: Unlike a court trial, negotiation does not involve formal legal procedures, which may limit the parties' ability to seek legal remedies if the negotiation fails.

  4. Time-consuming: Negotiation can be time-consuming, especially if the parties have complex issues to address or if there are significant differences in their positions.

Someone may want to participate in negotiation if they value having control over the outcome, desire a flexible and collaborative process, seek to preserve relationships, and want to potentially save time and costs associated with court litigation or third party involvement.

The decision to participate in negotiation depends on the specific circumstances, the parties' willingness to engage in discussions and compromise, and their preferences regarding the resolution process.

To navigate the intricacies of the legal and settlement process and maximize your chances of obtaining the best possible outcome, it is crucial to have an experienced and skilled attorney by your side. With over 30 years of experience in litigating and settling personal injury claims, my team and I possess the expertise and dedication required to advocate for your rights. We will work to build a strong case, negotiate with insurance companies, and advocate for you through the complexities of the insurance and legal system.

If you or someone you know has been injured in an accident, call my office at (978) 744-1220, fill out the contact form on our website, or text me at (978) 643-0552 for a free case evaluation. Together we will review the facts of your case, get your side of the story, and start working right away to get you the money you deserve. There is no fee unless you win.

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page