In 2011, the largest organization of lawyers in the United States, the American Bar Association (the ABA), rejected a resolution calling for the ABA to endorse the Uniform Collaborative Law Rules/Act. Largely used in the area of divorce, collaborative law is a process whereby specially trained lawyers enter into a four¬-party «participation agreement» between themselves and the two litigants that they will voluntarily share all information and work to reach an amicable agreement. In the event that the parties are unable to reach settlement, the agreement provides that neither attorney can continue in the case. This provision is essential to the collaborative law process, but it has also been controversial. The Colorado Bar Association issued a Formal Ethics Opinion in 2007 that such a provision violates the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct; but some other states, as well as the ABA, have disagreed that it is unethical. Nevertheless, in 2011 the ABA’s House of Delegates rejected the proposed Uniform Collaborative Law Rules/Act amid ethical concerns as well as concerns that it would involve state legislatures in the regulation of the practice of law. The article concludes that, especially in the realm of divorce, collaborative law is likely to continue growing notwithstanding the ABA’s rejection.