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


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