While I am not contending that the adversarial court system of dispute resolution upon which we have relied, should be dismantled, I will say that you must recognize the need for, existence, use and growth of other, very different alternative approaches to problem solving and dispute resolution. And, as we explore the different processes, a consequence is a modification of role of the lawyer and corresponding revisions in professional obligations. Much has changed within the practice of law, and will continue to do so at a rapid rate. Lawyers are asked to do more, and be more, than warriors for their clients in court or court-annexed activities. In particular, new processes for problem solving and dispute resolution are included within the context of the lawyer's work.
Lawyers use rules for guides of their behavior.
Rules of procedure - civil and criminal. Rules of evidence. Without such rules, many lawyers may not be sure of the expectations or correct conduct in which to engage. The first is a requirement that a lawyer must inform his or her client about the existence of ADR processes and procedures. Some states such as Colorado and Texas have already enacted such statements, although for the most part these are aspirational, or alternatively, contain the language, 'when appropriate'.