Chief U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty told an audience of lawyers on Wednesday that despite his status as the most prolific settler of cases on Colorado’s federal trial court, his upcoming retirement should not be cause for concern that settlements will diminish.

“I fully believe there are many cases that should be tried to a jury. I’ve tried 30-35 here,” said Hegarty, speaking at the Alfred A. Arraj U.S. Courthouse in Denver. “But there are many that don’t need to be, and the wisest use of everyone’s time is to resolve it.”

Hegarty is stepping down in January after having facilitated more than 1,400 settlement conferences since joining the bench in 2006. When he first stepped into the role, Hegarty recalled the presidentially appointed district judges felt the most important responsibility of magistrate judges was signing off on criminal warrants. The second priority was conducting settlement conferences in civil cases.

“We were doing about 900 settlement conferences a year. I was doing around 180 myself. Sometimes, three at once. So, I would have six rooms in a courthouse,” Hegarty described, adding his law clerk would follow him “like a doctor’s assistant with a bunch of medical records.”

However, in 2012 the district court shifted toward a different means of satisfying its congressionally mandated duty to provide alternate dispute resolution. It instituted “early neutral evaluations,” an optional — and rarely used — procedure permitting judges to give their non-binding assessment of a case. Afterward, settlement conferences dipped to just 116 in 2013, Hegarty said.

This year, the court is on track to complete 170-180 settlements between its nine full- and part-time magistrate judges, with an estimated 80% success rate.

“Everyone’s numbers are going up across the board,” said Hegarty. “In my view, settlement conferences are back in good graces in all corners of the courthouse. I think we’re on the verge of a renaissance for settlement conferences.”

Settlements facilitated by magistrate judges far eclipse the number of trials at the district court, which amounted to 51 total last year. Settlements can also be time intensive, with Hegarty spending 160 hours to settle one case over several months — all while needing to draft decisions and recommendations in other litigation. Hegarty said some judges have the view that if parties to a federal case wish to settle, they can go to private mediators for that service.

However, he continued, his opinion is that resolving a case early will save judges time in issuing orders, presiding over the discovery of evidence and conducting a trial — with the possibility of appeal afterward.

“A settlement is simply a negotiation repositioning the parties’ legal position vis-à-vis one another,” said Hegarty. He elaborated that a settlement raises the possibility that he can convince a defendant to agree to certain things the plaintiff might not obtain otherwise through trial.

“That only comes by experience. What’s really fun for me, since I don’t get to be a trial lawyer anymore, this is my chance to win,” he said. “I love it when I can get to something and both sides go, ‘We would have never thought of that. That’s perfect!'”

He acknowledged some lawyers may be fearful of asking a magistrate judge about facilitating a settlement conference because it may signal to the opposing side that they perceive their case to be weak. But Hegarty said attorneys can circumvent that perception by always asking magistrate judges to explain their settlement protocols as a matter of course.

Sometimes, Hegarty said he will raise the possibility of settlement himself during a courtroom appearance, calling the parties up to the bench to negotiate one at a time.

“My experience is I like it when one side is unrepresented, mostly. Because honestly, it’s the attorney who’s interfering with the progression for the settlements,” he said, adding that magistrate judges are empowered to appoint pro bono lawyers solely to represent a party in settlements if necessary.

Hegarty surveyed the other magistrate judges on the court about their pet peeves during settlement conferences. Among their frustrations were attorneys who make unreasonable initial demands, who fail to prepare their client or who engage in “chest thumping” in front of the judge.

He said he respects attorneys who are candid with him about hang-ups their clients are having.

“If I’m having a hard time getting someplace, and it seems like I’ve convinced you (the lawyer), why aren’t we getting closer? Let me know,” he said.

None of the magistrate judges predicted court-facilitated settlements will decrease after Hegarty’s departure, but he acknowledged the large amount of turnover in recent years means the newer magistrate judges will need time to perfect their style. However, Hegarty reminded the audience that the magistrate judges were all trial attorneys, so they are familiar with the dynamics of civil litigation.

He also advised that for many litigants, a settlement conference may be the only opportunity for them to be in court and state their case to a federal judge face-to-face. In that setting, Hegarty said he is able to learn about what the parties actually need for a resolution.

“Maybe you never even asked the ultimate question: What’s the basic wrong here? The law was violated? Fine. But what is it you really want to bring you back to a place where you can have peace?” he said. “If I can find that, that’s great.”