More than ever before it seems to me that we are reading what has historically been confidential mediation information.
Most of the time, in the blogosphere at least, it’s a mediation participant ventilating about the mediator, the ex or the telephone company in some form of online diary – like here – just to pull one of yesterday’s examples off the wires.
Harmless stuff really, and not widely read.
But I’m seeing more reports that name names and give numbers – this one for instance appearing on the JAMS website yesterday where the mediation parties are identified along with the “main issue” and the result.
‘After two days of mediation, JAMS Neutral Hon. Edward G. (Pete) Biester, Jr. (Ret.) helped parties reach a $2.2 million settlement in a lawsuit involving a man who was seriously injured when a dead tree fell on his car while he was driving on a Bucks County, Pennsylvania road.
The plaintiffs, Ilya Vasserman and his wife, sued the State Department of Transportation, a company contracted by the Department to inspect trees, and the owner of the property with the tree. The main issue during the mediation revolved around who was responsible for the maintenance and care of the dead tree so that it would not injure drivers or passengers on the road.
Judge Biester was able to work closely with the parties and various insurance companies to reach an acceptable settlement…’
I am the first to say I have no idea whether this JAMS case and its mediated resolution is already in the public domain or maybe consent was obtained – or it really is an example of a developing trend.
All I know is – it’s happening often.
And this blog is not lilly white either; Rehearsing in poetry, but practising in prose- the anatomy of a manly mediation.
REPRINTED WITH PERMISSION. Reprinted from Dispute Resolution Journal, February 1998. Published by the American Arbitration Association, 335 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10017 © 1998The intent of Title I, the...By Judith Cohen, Samuel H DeShazer