I’ve had a couple recently. I had a guy that I was representing the husband and the father and it was a small child. The mother was more of a stay-at-home mom. The guy, the dad, had a couple of businesses and I think the process worked much, much better for him. We were able to preserve his businesses and we arrived at a number in valuing the business that he felt comfortable with. We had one neutral expert. We didn’t have competing experts and I think the end result was good for him.

We also maximized his time with his child and then I had another case recently where the client was accused of family violence. They were seeking a protective order and we entered into a structured settlement process. And I think through that process there was no protective order placed on him and the mother in that case was very concerned about him and his relationship with the children. And I think in the end, it took some time, but in the end, he has a normal relationship with his children at this time, as we are about to conclude the case. And so he sees them just as consistently as somebody would be if there had never been allegations of family violence. So I think that that whole family violence issue was dealt with in a productive way for both him and for the mother and the children and I think that if that had been litigation, it would have been a lot different.