Law Commons^™

Humanizing Virtual Dispute Resolution, Elayne E. Greenberg

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

How might neutrals and advocates foster interpersonal dynamics when conducting arbitrations and mediations virtually, consistent with the ethical obligations of each profession and the ethical underpinnings of each process?

Virtual dispute resolution for commercial dispute resolution has become the new normal. Yet, the dispute resolution listserves are still peppered with posts from mediators and arbitrators who, although publicly extolling their own commitments to their impartiality and neutrality, are also simultaneously voicing their strong preferences for conducting their dispute resolution processes in person. According to these neutrals, they are unable to attain the same results when the process is conducted …

Up Close And Personal: Whether Or Not You Decide To Report A Confidentiality Exception, Elayne E. Greenberg

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In your role as lawyer or neutral, have you ever reported an otherwise confidential communication because it was one of these permissible confidentiality exceptions? Why? This column will discuss how our ethical and personal considerations shape our decisions as advocates and dispute resolution professionals about whether to report ethically permissible exceptions to confidentiality. Readers, you are invited to rethink your ethical reporting obligations and develop more self-awareness about your personal rationales for your reporting choices.

Confidentiality: The Illusion And The Reality— Affirmative Steps For Lawyers And Mediators To Help Safeguard Their Mediation Communications, Elayne E. Greenberg

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Confidentiality is one promise of mediation that is increasingly broken, even though judges, lawyers and mediators frequently extol the sacredness of mediation confidentiality as a primary benefit for considering mediation as a settlement forum. We observe that legal challenges to any aspect of the mediation have caused judges to scrutinize mediation communications in a way that renders mediation confidentiality vulnerable at a minimum and violated at the worst. We are finding it a chronic challenge to decipher the precise and appropriate boundaries of mediation confidentiality. Moreover, we are increasingly discomforted to see that even unsuccessful legal challenges to mediation …

The Globalized Practice Of Law: Part Two - It’S A Small World After All: Cultural Competence With Your International Brethren, Elayne E. Greenberg

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Globalization is a “force majeure” that is growing and shaping the practice of law. As increasing numbers of New York lawyers represent clients in transnational and cross-border matters, many New York attorneys are welcoming the enriching perspectives that their international brethren bring to deal making and dispute resolution. However, culturally competent lawyers are also cognizant of how the different and sometimes disparate ethical obligations and values held by their colleagues from civil law countries are influencing and, at times, complicating their dispute resolution efforts. In the previous column, I discussed how our perceptions, communications and preferential modes for resolving …

Confidentiality In Arbitration: Beyond The Myth, Richard C. Reuben

Faculty Publications

Many people assume that arbitration is private and confidential. But is that assumption accurate? This article is the first to explore that question in the important context of whether arbitration communications can be discovered and admitted into evidence in other legal proceedings - a question that is just beginning to show up in the cases. It first surveys the federal and state statutory and case law, finding that arbitration communications in fact are generally discoverable and admissible. It then considers the normative desirability of discovering and admitting arbitration communications evidence, concluding that the free discovery and admissibility of arbitration communications …

Untangling The Privacy Paradox In Arbitration, Amy J. Schmitz

Faculty Publications

Arbitration is private but not secret. This truism regarding arbitration seems contradictory and nonsensical. However, common understandings of privacy in arbitration often lull individuals into assuming personal information revealed in arbitration may not become public. They assume privacy and confidentiality are synonymous. The reality is that arbitration is private but not necessarily confidential, or secret. This is the privacy paradox: it defies common conceptions of arbitration's secrecy, but is nonetheless true. This paradox is problematic because it leads to shortsighted contracting and simplistic assumptions about arbitral justice. Moreover, it may foster injustice when repeat players unduly benefit from unpublished awards …

Using Dispute System Design Methods To Promote Good-Faith Participation In Court-Connected Mediation Programs, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

This article discusses what can be done to promote productive behavior in mediation and reduce bad conduct. Although most participants do not abuse the mediation process, some people use mediation to drag out litigation, gain leverage for later negotiations, and generally wear down the opposition. Rules requiring good-faith participation are likely to be ineffective and possibly counterproductive. This article proposes using dispute system design principles to develop policies satisfying the interests of stakeholders in court-connected mediation programs. After outlining important interests of key stakeholder groups, including litigants, attorneys, courts, and mediators, the Article describes specific policies that could satisfy their …

Court Issues Major Ruling On Mediation Confidentiality, Richard C. Reuben

Faculty Publications

A prominent federal court judge has issued an important ruling on mediation confidentiality, one that promises to influence both doctrinal and legislative development.

The case is Olan v Congress Mortgage Co., 1999 WL 909731 (N.D.Cal.), and in it, federal Magistrate Judge Wayne Brazil ultimately compels testimony by a California mediator, despite California's categorical exclusion of evidence arising from mediations. The lengthy opinion is most scholarly, and well worth taking the time to read.

Choppy Waters, Richard C. Reuben, Nancy H. Rogers

Faculty Publications

The movement toward a uniform standard for confidentiality in mediation among the states is one that from the outset casts off into choppy waters, marked by pitching cross-currents of remarkable force.

Drafting Mediation Privileges: Lessons From The Civil Justice Reform Act, Michael A. Perino

Faculty Publications

Mediation confidentiality provisions or privileges are now prevalent throughout the United States. Forty-one states have enacted some form of mediation privilege. As part of the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1990, Congress enacted legislation to protect confidentiality in mediations involving federal agencies. An additional source for such provisions is the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 (CJRA), which required each federal district court to implement a civil justice expense and delay reduction plan (Plan(s)) by the end of 1993. Those Plans seek to implement mechanisms designed to address causes of excessive expense and delay in the federal courts.

A number …