If Anyone Needs a Mediator, It’s These People.

Two sides sit across a table.  They are faced with a major problem.  Both are adamant that their position is the strongest.  They’ve bickered and argued for months, creating a stalemate that has caused considerable damage to their business, their reputations, their relationships, as well as their future ability to work together.

Sound familiar?  Sure.  It probably sounds just like many of the cases with which you deal.  If this were a business dispute, someone would probably suggest mediation.  Having a neutral go-between could ease the tensions and sort out the issues, identifying some common ground on which to build.

But it isn’t.

Who needs a mediator more than anyone else in our country right now?  The boobs Solons running our government. Partisanship on both sides of the political aisle has caused a stalemate in the debate over health insurance reform.  It’s a particularly sad day when the putative leader of the Free World utters the phrase, “”I don’t know that those gaps can be bridged.”

Unfortunately, as Sen. Bayh recently pointed out, the deal makers, the moderates, the pragmatic members of our government have abdicated any role to the demagogues on the fringes.It doesn’t matter what side you support.  Both sides need to move from their entrenched positions and discuss real options, not just talking points prepared by pointy headed people in Ivory Towers or tucked inside the Beltway.  Having a mediator involved would be very useful.

Please forgive my foray into politics but the analogy seemed quite obvious to me.

The Latest CKA Mediation and Arbitration Report is Online.

I released my latest report/newsletter yesterday to several hundred friends, clients and prospective clients.  You can find a web-based version of it here.   I hope you find the tips useful the next time you mediate.

-Chris

Barking Dog Mediation on the Rise

I recently came across this article noting that “there has been a 30 per cent rise in the number of mediations between neighbors over animal nuisance problems” in the Australian province of New South Wales.   On the one hand, I was glad to hear that parties are turning to mediation to solve disputes and realizing that mediation often creates more stable solutions than a court ruling because “the parties themselves have had input into them and have had a better understanding of the issues between them.”

On the other hand, I really have to wonder whether this improves the public image of mediators or simply causes the average person to think of a mediator who helps parties resolve mundane, trivial matters.

Just thinking out loud.

A little horn-tooting.

I’ve heard it said that it is a sad dog that doesn’t wag his own tail, so here I am wagging.  I just posted some new testimonials on my site.  Here are some excerpts:

“I was amazed we accomplished what we did.”

“Chris’ calm and confident demeanor helped my clients and the opposing parties avoid the emotional outbursts that had frustrated all prior settlement discussions”

and

“I was really impressed by how quickly Chris understood the issues and personalities that had been a barrier to settlement, and how he brought to the table, not just an understanding of the law, but some practical solutions that neither side had considered.”

A Time to Write?

After a nearly three month hiatus, it might be time for me to start blogging again. I hope to post at least weekly.  I think that I can manage that. Since I really have nothing terribly substantial to say right now, I will start with a funny story that a good friend told me I should post on my blog.

My friend, let’s call him Brett, recently changed firms, moving from one well known BigLaw firm to another. Today, when I visited LinkedIn, the popular social/business networking site, it suggested that I send Brett a note congratulating him on his move. So I did.  Of course, I had to give him some terribly un-politically correct ribbing about his new title of “Special” Counsel.

Moments after hitting send, I received an “out-of-office” email reply from Brett’s email address at  his former firm notifying me that “Brett is no longer with the Firm.”

Yes.  They capitalized “Firm” as if there was only one “Firm”.  Or they were trying to subtly reveal that they were the titular Firm in that John Grisham novel. Or maybe that they were a front for a shady government black ops agency.

The Joys of Dealing With the Pro Se Party – Part 2

When we last left our hero (me), I was dealing with the pro se party from hell.  It took three different conversations with both me and the ADR office just to confirm whether he would even appear at the mediation.

The only two things he made clear were that he wasn’t gonna pay me and he wanted to come strapped.  That is, for the street-impaired, carrying a pistol.

I’m not sure his question about carrying in the Courthouse was a threat, more of a practical question from a man likely used to carrying a concealed weapon. This is Georgia.  Besides, in my experience, the people that make threats are the ones least likely to actually follow through with them.  Despite this, I alerted court security (and the insurance company lawyer).

The appointed time finally arrived.   The Sheriff’s Department quite generously, cautiously, and turns out, unnecessarily, assigned quite a large, armed deputy to shadow me.

The particulars of the mediation aren’t really important except to say it didn’t last very long.  For one thing, after I handed him the court referred mediation guidelines to review and sign, he told me he was illiterate.  I had no real reason to question his veracity, but when the defense told us the amount of the medical bills for this personal injury claim, he had no trouble quickly tripling that amount in his head to come up with a damages demand [Some lawyers use that as a very loose rule of thumb in Georgia to calculate damages].

Second, he had nothing with him.  I mean nothing.  No bills, no receipts, no records, no radiology reports, no police report.  Nothing.  Just the Notice telling him when and where to be, which he apparently figured out despite telling me he was illiterate.

Finally, he was either sadly mistaken or completely untruthful as he repeatedly claimed that he had not been compensated for his property damages.  The defense had all the necessary paperwork showing that he filed a claim but was not paid because he owed about as much on the truck as it was worth.

I am always wary of dealing with the typical pro se for various reasons.  First and foremost, just about anything I say can be wrongfully interpreted as legal advice or undue influence.  Secondly, as an experienced attorney, I am distrustful of anyone who can’t find a single lawyer to take his claim. I’ve seen some very dubious claims asserted by some very dubious attorneys.  But this guy took the cake.  He a) didn’t want to mediate the case in the first place; b) steadfastly refused to pay me; c) made a not-so-veiled threat about carrying a gun into the courthouse; and d)  claimed to be unable to read and sign any documents.

Thankfully, my practice of late has avoided any pro se parties.