Fiduciary Law Blog Archive
  • Home
  • FAQ
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu
Blog - Latest News

Mediator Moment – Finis Origine Pendet

June 24, 2013/in Arbitration, Mediation

by C. Jean Stewart

I have spent the last few days at the Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution at Pepperdine University in Malibu, California participating in one of their excellent advanced mediation courses with alternative dispute resolution practitioners from around the world.  We devoted plenty of class time to the discussion and appreciation of designing dispute resolution scenarios that will yield success. 

Spending the time and effort to design an appropriate alternative dispute resolution model can pay handsome dividends. I have always observed that cases that are rushed into mediation, without adequate attention paid to the design and preparation phase, frequently yield dissatisfaction in one or more dimensions. I thought I would report here on a satisfying result that recently came from a thoughtfully planned process.

Counsel in a contested trust matter approached me to design an arbitration/mediation session that has persuaded me to encourage parties and their counsel to consider this idea when faced with a certain kind of dispute.

Here’s how it worked:  In preparation for Stage One of the session, counsel presented statements that were NOT confidential, but were shared with me and with each other.  Counsel included some stipulated exhibits and pleadings. The engagement included an understanding that there would be NO ex parte communications with me until Stage One of the session was completed. The parties had agreed to abide by whatever award/decision I made on the issues, but more importantly, agreed that before I informed them of that award/decision, they would participate in good faith mediation.

On the day the session began, Stage One was an arbitration in the form of a mini-trial complete with opening statements, direct and cross examination of a witness on each side of the case, admission of the stipulated exhibits and closing arguments. At the end of the mini-trial, I took a brief recess, recorded my decision in a brief written summary, placed it in a sealed envelope that I signed and laid aside. 

We then adjourned to Stage Two, which was a mediation, including private caucuses, where the parties made confidential disclosures to me and participated in meaningful, good faith negotiations leading to a settlement of the issues which was reduced to written form and signed by the parties. Ultimately the sealed envelope containing the award/decision was shredded without being revealed to either party or to counsel.

This model is appropriate in cases where the parties want a final and definitive resolution without additional litigation in a case with discrete, identifiable issues.  It addresses the several ethical issues that have prevented me from agreeing to participate in arbitration after a mediation session for the same parties.  Some of the other factors that contributed to the success of this model were: These attorneys were both excellent, presenting crisp and efficient arguments and witness examinations. Their clients were attentive and engaged and left me with a clear understanding of the issues. I applaud these attorneys for creating this opportunity for dispute resolution that I will surely recommend again when the occasion arises.

 

I also appreciate the opportunity to apply the Latin expression that was emphasized in our sessions at the Straus Institute, Finis Origine Pendet -  “the end depends on the beginning.”

https://fiduciarylawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.png 0 0 admin https://fiduciarylawblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/logo_vertical-v2.png admin2013-06-24 10:26:352013-06-24 10:26:35Mediator Moment – Finis Origine Pendet

Fiduciary Law Blog Archive

NOTE: This blog is no longer an active blog. For the foreseeable future, we will not be contributing content. However, we continue to offer the already published content as a service to anyone interested in the topics Holland & Hart’s Trust & Estates team covered here.

Trust & Estate Litigation Practice

Holland & Hart has one of the premiere trust and estate litigation practices in the Mountain West Region. We offer legal services in the areas of probate, trust, and fiduciary litigation, and provide customized solutions to fiduciaries with the intent of avoiding future litigation. Our team represents trustees, financial institutions, trust companies, beneficiaries, creditors, agents under powers of attorney, and individuals in probate, trust, and fiduciary disputes. As part of a full-service law firm, we can also provide streamlined coordination with attorneys in other related disciplines to provide maximum efficiency and effectiveness. Click here to read more.

Categories

  • Administration Expenses
  • Administration of Estate
  • Administration of Trust
  • Alternative Dispute Resolution
  • Arbitration
  • Bonds
  • Charities
  • Conservator
  • Court Procedures
  • Elder Law
  • Estate Planning
  • Fees
  • Fiduciary Discretion
  • Fiduciary Duties
  • Fiduciary Litigation
  • Guardian
  • Legislation
  • Life Insurance
  • Mediation
  • Personal Representative
  • Powers of Attorney
  • Removal of Fiduciary
  • Settlement of Controversies
  • Surcharge of Fiduciary
  • Taxes
  • Testamentary Capacity
  • Testamentary Intent
  • Trust Litigation
  • Trustee
  • Uncategorized
  • Undue Influence
  • Will & Trust Construction

Archives

Blog Authors

Desta Asfaw
Margot Edwards
Jody Hall
Richard Kiely
Andrew LeMieux
Megan Meyers
Peter O’Brien
Kami Pomerantz
Helen Rogers
Carol Warnick

About the Firm

Holland & Hart is a full-service law firm with locations in 14 offices. Throughout the Mountain West, from coast to coast and beyond, Holland & Hart provides clients with sharp legal counsel from a vantage like no other. For more information, visit www.hollandhart.com or on Twitter: @HollandHart.

Disclaimer

This publication is designed to provide general information on pertinent legal topics. The statements made are provided for educational purposes only. They do not constitute legal or financial advice nor do they necessarily reflect the views of Holland & Hart LLP or any of its attorneys other than the author. This publication is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship between you and Holland & Hart LLP. Substantive changes in the law subsequent to the date of this publication might affect the analysis or commentary. Similarly, the analysis may differ depending on the jurisdiction or circumstances. If you have specific questions as to the application of the law to your activities, you should seek the advice of your legal counsel.

Privacy Policy

View our privacy policy.

© Copyright - Holland & Hart LLP - Enfold Theme by Kriesi
Link to: Practicing Law in Three States Link to: Practicing Law in Three States Practicing Law in Three States Link to: Trying to Do the Right Thing – Ethics and Estate Planning Link to: Trying to Do the Right Thing – Ethics and Estate Planning Trying to Do the Right Thing – Ethics and Estate Planning
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top