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


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