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


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