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


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