Sep. 4, 2010
Mediators Have No Part To Play in Act 3
A state appellate court recently held that at the conclusion of mediation, the mediator is prohibited from clarifying any subsequent disputes.
A. Marco Turk
Emeritus Professor, CSU Dominguez Hills
Email: amarcoturk.commentary@gmail.com
A. Marco Turk is a contributing writer, professor emeritus and former director of the Negotiation, Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding program at CSU Dominguez Hills, and currently adjunct professor of law, Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution, Pepperdine University Caruso School of Law.
The California Court of Appeal (2nd District, Divison Six) recently decided in Radford v. Shehorn (B216323, filed Aug. 19, 2010) that upon conclusion of mediation, the mediator is prohibited from offering to clarify anything regarding the mediation including a dispute over the settlement, except when agreed to by the parties.
In Radford, the court was presented with facts disclosing a signed two-page mediation settlement agreement arrived at during the session, follo...For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In