Divorce Mediation Blog

Masters and the Probate & Family Courts

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

The Probate and Family Court appoint two kinds of “masters”. A master is a lawyer who holds hearings as an extension of the Court itself. One kind is a “discovery master”. The other is a “master, facts final”.

A discovery master aids the Court’s case management by helping the attorneys negotiate, and if necessary by deciding disputes over the exchange of information, known as discovery, in the litigation process. Each side may challenge the discovery master’s decision to the appointing judge, but they rarely do so. This is because the lawyers generally feel that the master process was fair and that a judge will likely address the issue in the same or a similar fashion as the master.

A master, facts final, hears some or all of the contested case, and makes a recommended judgment. The process follows the same rules as in court, unless the parties agree otherwise. One or both parties ask the Court to “confirm” the master’s recommended judgment. If one party disagrees, he or she retains the right to oppose the entry of the master’s decision and a court judgment. The Court retains the right to accept or reject the master’s recommendation in whole or in part.

Where parties cannot settle their matter by direct negotiation, by mediation or otherwise, the use of either kind of master is a way in which they can maximize control over their case, by selecting their own master, and by pursuing what is a mostly private proceeding that most often results in the agreed entry of judgment based thereon.

With our courts in crisis, this avenue is being followed more and more. Most every judge is happy to approve a selected master and to stand by for the master’s result. When faced with long delays and abounding uncertainties in the public trial process, due consideration should be given to the use of a master for all or part of a contested case.

Get e-mail notifications of new blog posts! Enter email address below.:

Delivered by FeedBurner

other articles

recent posts


health insurance alimony law dispute resolution high-risk methodology special master divorce mediators family law arbitrators Uniform Arbitration Act DOMA Baseball Players traditional negotiations Child Support Guidelines Same Sex Marriage divorce judgment Divorce Agreements Massachusetts divorce mediators arbitrators conciliation Levine Dispute Resolutions Self-adjusting alimony orders alimony statute lawyer divorce arbitration divorced divorce and family law family mediation divorce agreement family law divorce litigation support orders divorce and family law mediators family law arbitrator Obamacare Matrimonial Arbitration alimony reform legislation Massachusetts alimony and child support med/arb mediators lawyer-attended mediation Massachusetts Alimony Reform Act Levine Dispute Resolution Center LLC mediation Massachusetts self-adjusting alimony litigation private dispute resolution Baseball Arbitration LDRC divorce mediations Act Reforming Alimony in the Commonwealth health coverage family law mediation divorce mediation arbitration Twinkies resolve disputes Baseball Massachusetts alimony disputes Cohabitation divorce arbitrators how baseball arbitration works med-arb General term alimony Chouteau Levine Boston Massachusetts lawyers family and probate law disputes mediator alimony child support Alimony Reform Act divorce arbitrator divorce process divorce lawyers lawyers Divorce IRC §2704 SJC divorce mediator Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly The Seven Sins of Alimony mediations separation family support arbitrator MLB labor agreement medical benefits COLA facilitated negotiations annulment Defense of Marriage Act fraud Major League Baseball Arbitration alimony orders Family Law Arbitration Levine Dispute Resolution Center Levine Dispute Resolution pre-ARA alimony rehabilitative alimony