Category to allow 4 post to be featured under the top feature of the blog page.

A Mediation Story

The claim was decades old; indemnity was supposedly fully paid. The carrier hadn’t paid a medical bill in years. The applicant had dismissed her attorney, but continued to pursue the claim.

The carrier wanted the claim off the books, so they called me. Without prompting, the adjuster disclosed his authority limit to me in an email.

The applicant, the carrier’s hearing rep, and I met for mediation.

While there was no question the applicant was disabled, the dispute was whether the disability was industrial. Thankfully, the applicant had a very good alternate form of medical insurance which had been providing and continued to provide full coverage.

I spent time with the parties separately, allowing each of them to vent about how they had been taken advantage of by the other. Issues were raised, demands and offers exchanged. While remaining neutral, I empathized with both parties, discussing pros and cons. Finally, the hearing rep made what he said was an offer of his full authority.  I showed him my print-out of the email which showed authority for an additional $15,000. 

He stared at me.  “I have to make a call.” 

“Let’s make it together,” I said.

We got on the phone to the adjuster who said the hearing rep was correct. “Mike” (not the real name), I said, “Are you able to take a look at your email to me of [the email date]?”

“Yes, I see it.”

“That says your authority is $15,000 more.”

“Oh, I didn’t have that authority. I never had that authority.” 

I did NOT say, “Then why did you tell me that’s what you had?”

Instead, I went to the room where the applicant was waiting and put the hearing rep’s offer on the table.

“I have to call my spouse.” I left the room to give her some privacy.

After a little while, the applicant told me her spouse said the offer was an absolute non-starter.

The hearing rep stated he had to leave for another commitment, and the mediation adjourned without resolution.

A few days later, the applicant called me to ask if the offer was still open.  I said I would check.

The case settled by Compromise & Release for the amount of the hearing rep’s offer.

The Lesson

Parties sometimes need time to process everything that happened at mediation. They may have learned about new issues or gained new insights about the basis for the opponent’s position. People often have a negative kneejerk reaction to a demand or offer. After some time to cool down, they may be able to understand a different point of view, even if they don’t agree with it.

Think about why this case settled. What did the applicant gain by being able to talk about the claim with the mediator? What do you think happened between her and her spouse once she got home? What can you conclude about pre-mediation communication between the adjuster and the hearing rep, between the adjuster and the applicant?

How important is it to have everyone who will participate in making the settlement decision attend the mediation?

Four Necessities for Mediation Success

These four attributes are integral to an effective mediation.

Fairness
The process and the person conducting the process must be fair. What’s more, all participants must perceive them as fair. Mediation is a level playing field. This safe, neutral environment is a good place to test the validity of an argument.

The mediator is a professional neutral. Without preconceptions, she can serve as a sounding board for every person’s position. 

Respect
Agreeing to mediation shows respect for others. It signals a willingness to listen. This signal is reinforced by exercising courtesy and diligence in the scheduling process and following through up to, at, and after the meeting.

Communication
Any credibility earned before mediation is squandered if parties demonstrate they are not listening during negotiations. Failure to listen is shown by an inappropriate response, such as shouting at or insulting the opponent or refusing to continue participation.  It may seem counter-intuitive, but the mediator can facilitate communication between parties by separating them and using shuttle diplomacy to calmly convey each party’s message.

Trust
No negotiation result is satisfactory if the parties do not trust the other side to follow through. If mistrust has arisen due to past misunderstandings and broken promises, part of the mediator’s job is to re-build enough trust to resolve the dispute.

One solution to this problem may be to use a different negotiator at mediation, someone who does not incite personal animosity. Another solution is to make sure all agreements are specific and documented before parties leave the mediation. Particularly when the relationship has been hostile, the mediator is the linchpin in parties’ trust in a negotiated agreement.

New Mediation Disclosure Law

Effective January 1, 2019, California attorneys must provide a written mediation disclosure statement to clients or face potential disciplinary consequences.

What Does the New Law Do?
The disclosure does not protect clients so much as inform them about mediation confidentiality. Under changes to the Evidence Code, attorneys must have clients sign off on a mediation disclosure form as soon as reasonably possible before the client agrees to participate in mediation. If the attorney is hired after the client has agreed to mediate, the attorney must get the client’s sign-off as soon as reasonably possible after being retained. If the client signed off on a disclosure with prior counsel, new counsel should get another acknowledgement naming the current attorney. All clients should sign it.

The disclosure must be on a single page not attached to any other document and must be printed in the preferred language of the client in at least 12-point font. It must include the names of the attorney and the client and be signed and dated by the attorney and the client.

The law specifically contemplates an “attorney disciplinary proceeding to determine whether the attorney has complied with Section 1129.”

Unh-Unh, Not Me
What if the Evidence Code doesn’t apply to your practice area? You work in administrative law, such as Workers Compensation, or limit your practice to federal court.

Even if you never handle a case with a state civil court aspect nor a federal case with diversity jurisdiction, observing the new rule is the safe choice.That this amendment passed at all started with concerns about legal malpractice suits founded on communications within the mediation process. Legal malpractice suits are filed in state court or rely on diversity jurisdiction using state rules. Mediation confidentiality rules apply to all types of practice.

What Does the Disclosure Do—And Not Do?
The disclosure lays out the basics of the mediation disclosure rules, i.e., an almost total evidentiary exclusion of communications. This includes legal advice provided to a client during the mediation. Absence of the client’s signature or that the client did not receive the form is not a ground for invalidating a settlement agreement.

The “safe harbor” disclosure form in Evidence Code 1129 assures clients they can still sue for malpractice or report misconduct to the State Bar, just not using any evidence relating to a mediation.

How To Comply
Attorneys who regularly mediate should consider obtaining the disclosure at the beginning of the representation. The safe harbor form doesn’t limit the disclosure to a single case. Nonetheless, attorneys working on multiple cases under an ongoing or tripartite relationship may wish to add language to make it clear that the client is executing a blanket sign-off.

Litigation Status Reports from the Confederate States of America

THINGS ARE GOING GREAT – LET’S KEEP FIGHTING

The fall of Atlanta “is not a calamity that endangers our cause.”
Montgomery, Alabama Advertiser, September 1864

 

“No former period of the war has contained such elements of encouragement for the South as the present.”
Richmond, Virginia Examiner, February 1865, 60 days before the surrender at Appomattox

 

Many clients receive litigation status reports that parallel the unfounded optimism in the South in the final months of the U.S. Civil War. People who try to settle cases often see litigants with that same willful refusal to recognize a failing battle effort. Parties and lawyers who have been living with a case for a long time may delude themselves about their chances of winning.

 

Lawyers in the Front Line
Typically, the lawyer is the front-line soldier with the best ability to assess how things are going. The client expects reliable status reports and guidance in choosing the best course for the litigation. Corporate and insurance clients usually require reports to include an evaluation.Clients want a lawyer who believes in their case. And lawyers have a duty both to the client and the legal system to represent the client “zealously within the bounds of the law.” But sometimes lawyers prepare status reports which mislead clients to pursue expensive and futile choices.Some lawyers seem to think they are litigation superheroes who can’t be beat. Dig deeper and you will find they settle most of their cases, but at what cost? The justification that the client would have gotten a worse deal without the lawyer’s extreme tactics may not be sound.Many lawyers are like animals burrowing a tunnel who never stick out their head to see where they are. They have a playbook they think they need to follow before even considering settlement. It seems like there is always one more report, one more deposition, one more motion they have to have.Lawyers also fear telling clients the unvarnished truth about their cases because the lawyers want to keep the gig. I’ve seen cases where it is the third lawyer on the case on each side. In one instance, the lawyer told me that both prior lawyers had counseled that the opponent’s settlement proposal was reasonable; each was fired. The current lawyer said, “You and I both know those lawyers were right, and they were fired. I am going to try the case.”
Those battles at Lookout Mountain and Missionary Ridge? According to the Mobile Register, union casualties were “ten times greater than ours.” In fact Confederacy casualties numbered 6,687 to the Union’s 5,815.
 
Psychological Reasons for Unfounded Optimism
There are psychological reasons why people refuse to settle. For example, people need to justify past expenditures, known as “sunk costs.” So they feel the need to keep fighting, even when settlement is the best way to stop that drain. Another is reactive devaluation, where people refuse to credit information from the opponent which conflicts with the belief system they have created for themselves.When litigation status reports only offer a choice among battle plans, clients may not realize settlement could be their best option.

Pass the Buck to the Mediator

Mediation is a good way to get the most belligerent parties to talk about settlement. Opposing sides don’t even have to sit together. Caucus sessions take place among the mediator and representatives of a single side. Nothing said in caucus gets repeated elsewhere without the party’s permission, so caucus is a safe place to discuss the weaknesses of a case as well as its merits.The mediator is a professional neutral. Parties can get the opinion of someone who comes to the case without preconception. This is closest to what could happen in court. The mediator can ask pertinent questions and bring the parties to partial or full agreement.When parties can’t bring themselves to agree, the mediator can suggest a mediator’s proposal to close the case. This allows everyone to save face and does not damage the attorney-client relationship.If you are creating or receiving litigation status reports that don’t consider mediation, an essential part of the plan may be missing. Mediation offers a timely, cost-effective way to end whatever war you’re fighting.