Legal conflicts avoid courtrooms as alternatives grow in popularity.

National Football League players, wanting new rules governing their free-agency status, take their case to court. As in most court cases, there is only one winner.

In a much publicized decision recently, the victors in this case were the players. The owners are furious and are appealing the decision and relationships between the two sides have deteriorated.

Ironically, Frank Rothman, the attorney for the NFL, is a member of the L.A. County Bar Association, which is expected to lead the state in adopting legislation promoting alternative dispute resolution -- methods of resolving disputes outside the court system.

"ADR is one of the most significant trends facing lawyers today," said Lauren Burton, director of Dispute Resolution Services for the Los Angeles County Bar. "The average lawyer really doesn't grasp how ADR will shape or form the practice of law."

There are probably many reasons the NFL case was not resolved through alternative means to litigation, such as mediation, arbitration or mini trials. First, both sides need to agree to taking their case outside the system.

The fact remains, however, that ADR has hit the mainstream with a growing momentum and attorneys and the public are having to refocus and rethink how they assist people in resolving disputes.

BankAmerica Corp. and Wells Fargo and Co. recently declared their commitment to solving disputes through ADR. Indeed, more and more clients are demanding that their lawyers prove why their cases should be litigated, according to local attorneys.

As a result, various efforts are being made to elevate ADR alternatives.

Richard Chernick, president of the L.A. County Bar Association, is directing meetings between the Trial Lawyers Association -- the principal opponents of ADR -- and others to reach a consensus on ADR for future legislation.

At the federal level, the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 requires all federal courts to take a look at ADR, but state mandates have been a mixed bag, said legal experts.

State bill AB 3011, which would have required all lawyers in California to advise clients of ADR alternatives, died in committee this summer. Chernick, therefore, is helping to form a compromise bill.

Another state bill, SB 1707, which would raise court filing fees from $3 to $8 to fund ADR services, was sent to Gov. Pete Wilson Aug. 25 and he has until the end of September to sign it into law.

In L.A., 11 different providers of ADR would be eligible to receive funds, said the county bar's Burton. These ADR outlets provide services on a sliding-scale fee and waive fees for low-income clients.

The L.A. County Bar has been providing ADR services since 1978. The service, which started out as the Neighborhood Justice Corp., is now an independent non-profit group called Dispute Resolution Services, which serves about 30,000 people a year, said Burton.

The ADR arm of the bar provides services in pre-filing disputes, attorney/client fee disputes and non-fee disputes; and it has a school mediation program in the Malibu and Santa Monica Unified School System, serving two middle schools and two elementary schools, said Burton. She said the bar plans to expand its peer mediation program to a middle school in the L.A. Unified School District in 1993.

The L.A. bar was successful in getting a resolution passed by the County Board of Supervisors two years ago, declaring a Mediation Week in L.A. County. And the state declared its first Mediation Week in 1991, showing displays on alternatives to litigation.

Now the L.A. bar is creating a section called Dispute Resolution Services, for lawyers and non-lawyers involved with ADR. "We're forming a new section because we think the future is lawyers who do dispute resolution for the firm," said Jerry Greenberg, director of public affairs for the bar. "We're seeing more individual lawyers who complement their practice by being a mediator but we expect to see whole practice areas."

In October 1991, the New York Center for Public Resources, a non-profit group that promotes ADR, initiated a law firm policy statement for attorneys to discuss ADR with clients. Since then, 1,600 large law firms signed the statement, including 36 law firms in L.A. They include all the big players: O'Melveny & Meyers, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, Latham & Watkins, Paul Hastings, Janofsky & Walker, Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro, Irell & Manella and Morrison & Foerster.

As a sign of the times, five lawyers formed their own firm in Century City a year and a half ago, specializing in mediation.

"More than 90 percent of cases that go into mediation settle," said Viggo Boserup, a partner with The Mediation Institute. "If lawyers don't use it (mediation) they're going to lose it."

The American Arbitration Association, a non-profit group that administers arbitration proceedings with a membership of 3,000 arbitrators, has seen its caseload in L.A. jump from about 800 cases annually five years ago to 2,000 cases today, said a spokeswoman from the L.A. office.

"The wake-up call has come," said Boserup. "Lawyers have priced themselves out of the market."

Boserup charges $250 an hour but he said cases are usually settled in a matter of days.