Interviewer: What is the difference between voluntary mediation and court-ordered mediation, where it just gets to the point where it`s ordered by a judge? Is there a real difference? Do not all parties still have to accept mediation, or does court-ordered mediation not work that way? Mediation is a conciliation process that takes place with the help of a neutral external mediator. However, arbitration is very similar to court proceedings. Arbitration involves elements of processes such as discovery, testimony, and arbitrators who listen to the facts, review the evidence, and then make a final decision. So, I tell you to the insurers (because they will certainly read this and listen to me), if you pay mediation fees in larger cases and not in smaller cases, stop it. Reverse this strategy. Stop paying for larger cases and pay for smaller cases. I guarantee you will settle more cases, and is that not why you want to arbitrate these smaller cases in the first place? Small cases are not economically wise cases that can be judged for both parties. However, the insurer is in a greater position to bear these litigation costs. Not only will you settle more cases, but the person you settle with may have your past, present or future insured, and the clientele you buy will be increased tenfold. I can`t tell you how many times the plaintiff leaves the room in UM cases after deciding to change insurers solely because of mediation and the perception of how he felt treated.
Especially in um cases, I encourage insurers to offer to cover mediation costs, even in cases that are not settled. The goodwill you buy is worth it. In college at UGA, I studied risk management and insurance. We have learned a lot about cost-benefit analysis. If insurers look at the costs of mediation based on a cost-benefit analysis, their strategy would change and they would pay more mediation fees in small cases and fewer brokerage fees in large cases. Ultimately, the insurer would save more money, not only because of the analysis from above, but also because small cases are usually shorter and cheaper than larger cases. If you are an advocate reading this, I hope you will pass it on to your tenants and managers for review. 5. Take the process seriously: Many court-ordered meditations are doomed to failure because lawyers simply go through the movements and don`t really want to participate. Completing the steps described in this article demonstrates the lawyer`s commitment to the mediation process.
If both parties approach mediation seriously, thoughtfully and well preparedly, success is virtually guaranteed. 9. Target Discovery: Once the issues are resolved, the right lawyers can agree on the targeted discovery that needs to be made before either party is ready to reassess their position. This can only involve reviewing a set of documents, summarizing damages, or receiving a key statement. With the necessary parties present together in the room, they can often agree on a timetable for the exchange of information and make favourable appointments to make the necessary statements. This approach saves both parties money and time, as the most important discovery is completed first. If this is done alone, mediation is a success. In Dallas, all courts follow this jurisdiction. In Collin County, north of Dallas and Plano, this is not the case. Some courts have mediation requirements, others do not. Whether they have it or not or whether the court does or not, you can always apply to file an application.
A party may file a petition to force the other party to mediate. The other way mediation usually happens is courts that have their own private rules that each court has, their own rules and procedures, even before putting a case on the trial list, it has to be publicized. Or, even if they put it on the list of processes, they want a specific date to complete the mediation. 6. Expect success: This is a self-fulfilling prophecy and there is little doubt that when court-ordered mediation is supposed to be a waste of time, it often ends that way. However, if the lawyer assumes that the good will happen and that progress will be made, this is often the case. At the very least, the expectation of success allows the board and client to be more receptive to the mediation process and the ideas that flow from it. Useful reflections and ideas emerge that allow the parties to move towards an agreement. 4. Bring the players: It`s obvious that “you can`t play cards without a card player”. Local court regulations require that all parties necessary to a decision be present at mediation. Discuss in advance with the adversary the parties and representatives needed to make decisions and who will participate in the mediation.
One of the great advantages of mediation is that it brings decision-makers face to face. Much more is done at the table than on the phone. “All-out” mediation not only creates a greater chance of resolving the dispute, but also focuses on the process if the case is not resolved. Glenn Loewenthal is a member of the Murphey team; To learn more about him or book him for your next mediation, visit Milesmediation.com The court can order this type of mediation if the parties appear without a lawyer or cannot afford private mediation. It is commonly referred to as the Alternative Dispute Resolution Conference (“ADR”). Similar to private mediation, ADR is always with a neutral third-party mediator (in Maricopa County, it`s usually a lawyer who gives of his time) and the goal is always for both parties to reach an agreement. However, with ADR, you get a date and time, and the mediator is not someone you choose, but someone who happens to be drawn from the court`s own list. .