Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
There are many reasons why parties to medical malpractice actions choose mediation over litigation. Among them are more control over timing, discovery issues and the question of who will help them to reach an ultimate conclusion in their case. But making the decision to go with mediation over litigation is not the only important decision to be made: If the optimum outcome is to be achieved, the parties and the mediator should consider the following tips.
Appropriate Demeanor
The subject of proper demeanor during proceedings is most often brought up with relation to how the litigants should comport themselves. But it is axiomatic that the conduct of the mediator can set the tone for the entire mediation.
The parties are seeking the mediator's assistance because they are unable to resolve their dispute on their own. When the mediator makes it clear that he recognizes the importance of the matter and conducts himself accordingly, the parties have more confidence in the process. Some may believe that humor or informality at the beginning of the process is helpful; this is not the case. The parties need to understand that the mediator knows their dispute is a serious one, and the mediator should act accordingly.
The mediation process is one the parties have chosen, and that choice should be given the attention it deserves. Mediation may be an alternative to dispute adjudication by a court but it is no less valuable and should be no less meaningful. The demeanor of the mediator and his approach to the parties and the issues are the standard by which the proceeding will be measured by the participants.
Preparation
While every mediator has his or her own style, it is essential that the mediator be as familiar with the underlying issues as is possible. The issues presented in a medical negligence case are not within the common experience of most people.
In order for the mediator to be effective, he must demonstrate familiarity with medical principles in the case. This is not necessarily adversarial education. Some mediators may choose to receive non-partisan educational submissions from the parties; others may choose to do that background check themselves.
Clearly, at some point in the preparation, the mediator should receive from the parties an appropriate summary of the specific issues that comprise the basis for the dispute at hand. While the nature and format of the submission may vary among mediators, the goal remains the same: to be able to assist the parties to successfully bring their dispute to a conclusion. To do this, the mediator needs to become thoroughly familiar with the parties' respective positions. The mediator's level of preparation will soon become apparent to the litigants, and without their comfort with his level of familiarity, the session will unlikely be successful.
Being Successful
Location: While it is often imperative for the parties to meet with the mediator in the presence of the other side, it is also necessary for the mediator to sometimes meet with the parties outside each others' presence. A party will obviously be more willing to share candidly with the mediator if the opponent is not present. Thus, the mediator should establish a location for the mediation that will give ample opportunity for various types of meetings. In multi-party situations, there may be a need to keep all parties separate and allow the mediator to go from room to room. And there may be times when the mediator will choose to meet with some but not all of the parties. It is incumbent upon the mediator to ensure that the location chosen for the session has appropriate rooms to meet space requirements.
Attendees: Few responses are more frustrating to the mediator than the age-old refrain, “I don't have authority to make that decision.” When a successful mediation begins to gain momentum and
direction, derailing it as a result of inability of the decision-makers is inexcusable. The mediator should ensure in advance that the ultimate decision-makers are either present or available by telephone throughout the session.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at customercare@alm.com or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?