Mediation “Reality” TV Revisited

The concept of the mediation-themed reality TV show has reared its ugly head yet again. As noted by Geoff Sharp and Vickie Pynchon, Jerry Lazar and Richard Kilnger (who makes a guest appearance in my comment section to defend the concept but conveniently forgets to mention he has a “piece of the action”), have been shopping a show called The Peacemaker.

According to the article, “The show has not proved an instant winner with television executives. . . . Lazar said he tries to emphasize the personal drama of mediations – a combination, as he puts it, of “Jerry Springer” and “Dr. Phil” – but realizes it is difficult to explain. ”

I’m on record as thinking this is stupid idea. And it appears that Hollywood may agree (for whatever reason).

Reality TV shows garner ratings by creating conflict – whether naturally or artificially: Taking food from starving castaways; Putting incompetent chefs in with experienced ones; pitting gold-digging strippers in trumped up “contests” to win the bed of an aging hair metal star. It’s contrived and it’s meant to appeal to our baser instinct. Even a show with a laudable goal – helping morbidly obese individuals lose weight – creates conflict by dangling Snickers bars, lasagna and french fries front of the newly slimmed down contestants.

As a colleague of mine said when I described the concept, “This show will only get viewers, advertisers, and top ratings if it depicts and exploits the dark side of conflict. No one gives a shit about the feel-good resolution at the end.”

This show will not raise awareness of mediation as a legitimate dispute resolution process any more than Judge Judy has helped steer litigants towards arbitration or Dr. Phil (or Sallie Jessie or Montel or Donohue or Oprah) have helped people with disabilities or mental illness seek counseling.

Frankly, I don’t want to spend the next 10 years of my career telling people, “No, its not just like on The Peacemaker.”

Europe moves to stifle free speech on the internet.

According to the ABA Journal Law Blog (quoting the WSJ), Europe has moved to ban so-called

flogs (fake blogs), AstroTurf (alleged grass-roots campaigns run by corporations) and lobbying campaigns featuring sock puppets (individuals who post under numerous aliases)

Is this such a rampant problem that European legislators have nothing better to do than prohibit this?  And how criminal of an activity is this that prison time is a possibility for violating this “law.”  What’s next?  Prison time for James Frey and Margaret B. Jones?

This would never abide here.  Or would it?

Last minute cancellation blues.

On Monday, I felt really good about the week.  I had 6 cases on the schedule. Three of which were at a decent hourly rate (I agreed to reduce my normal fee to accept court-referred cases from several exurban counties).  In the last 24 hours, I’ve had 3 of the 4 set for Thursday and Friday cancel.  Just when I thought I’d turned a corner.  I guess I have to take the good with the bad.

The $54 Million Laptop? Great….a Roy Pearson Copy Cat.

It appears we have our first confirmed Roy Pearson copy cat. Washington Area consumer Raelyn Campbell is suing Best Buy for $54 million after they lost her $1,100 laptop computer. What makes Ms. Campbell only slightly different from Pearson is that a) she seems to have a legitimate gripe against Best Buy; b) she appears to have been reasonable in attempting to resolve the matter; c) she admits that she “has no expectation she will win a multimillion-dollar judgment”; and d) Best Buy handled the problem poorly. What makes her exactly the same as the infamous Judge Pearson is that she became entrenched in her position and rejected reasonable offers that protected her interests and fairly compensated her.

More after the jump.

Besieged Judge Hilton Fuller Steps Down in Nichols Case

By now, this probably isn’t even news to Geoff Sharp in New Zealand, but since it was in my backyard, I thought I’d comment. As you may have heard, retired Judge Hilton Fuller stepped down as the presiding jurist in the Brian Nichols/Fulton County Courthouse shooting case after he was quoted in the New Yorker as saying,

“Everyone in the world knows he did it.”

Since taking over the case because every other sitting judge in Fulton County rightfully recused themselves, he has been nothing but a “debacle and embarrassment.” Those aren’t my words. Those are the words of a Fulton County Superior Court Judge in an email to his colleagues.

The defendant, Brian Nichols, is accused of killing four people, the judge presiding over his trial for rape, the court reporter, a Sheriff’s deputy and a federal agent nearly three years ago. He overpowered a 51-year old, 5′2″ female sheriff’s deputy, took her sidearm, entered the courtroom and shot Judge Rowland Barnes in the back of the head.

Judge Fuller allowed the defense team to charge $175 per hour, nearly twice the rate paid to other court appointed counsel, and rack up nearly $2 million in bills, to be paid by the taxpayers. Because the State refused to cave to this extortion, he halted the trial during jury selection. He was also criticized by the Georgia legislature and the Fulton County District Attorney.

Two “tough but fair” jurists have volunteered to take over the case.

I fully understand that he is entitled to a defense, and the potential grounds for appeal, but for nearly three years Judge Fuller has coddled this man and his defense lawyers, compounding this horrible tragedy and rendering it an absurd joke (in the existential, Jean-Paul Sartre sense of the word).

What Is Appropriate Law Firm Attire Nowadays?

A few weeks ago, I mentioned having seen a sign outside a local courtroom listing the attire the judge felt was inappropriate. One would expect that the list was for lay-people unaccustomed to the formality of appearing before the court. But an article from the WSJ (and a blog post) today suggest that such a list may have to be circulated among incoming first year associates.

Much like the blog poster at WSJ LawBlog, and many of you I suspect, I wore a suit every day for the first few years of practice. On occasion, I wore nice wool or wool blend khakis (not cotton ones from Old Navy) and a blue blazer or sport coat. The Dot-Com Explosion changed all that. Soon it was business casual Friday, then business casual all the time as 20- and 30-somethings with 6 and 7 zero venture capital funds started running companies while in their jeans. At the same time, we witnessed the rise of the celebrity culture, the return of $200 designer jeans and the relaxation of formalities and common courtesies brought on by the “instant on”, 24/7, MySpace, Facebook culture. The result now appears to be that younger lawyers wear what they want, when they want.

I wear a suit or a slacks/sport coat/tie combo to mediate cases. I couldn’t imagine showing up in jeans. I wouldn’t even wear jeans to the office on days when wearing jeans to work was encouraged (whether for charity or so-called “moving/spring clean” days). At least most of the younger lawyers I see on the days I mediate are wearing a suit or similar dress. I guess I truly am getting old.

(Of course, right now, I am wearing cycling shorts and t-shirt because I’m in my home office and plan to ride the stationary bike in a minute – but that’s different, I don’t have clients dropping over or partners to impress).

Another Parasitic Collection Agency Misusing the Word “Mediation.”

My daily Google Blog roundup email included a post entitled “Mediation, Not Confrontation.” Apparently, this is the slogan of Progressive Financial Services, a collection agency that has been harassing the blog author for several years (despite his insistence that he is not the person for whom they are looking).

A visit to the home page of these bottom feeders reveals that their “motto” is, indeed, “Mediation, Not Confrontation.” According to PFS,

Our collection motto of Mediation, not Confrontation enables PFS to liquidate our clients receivables and still protect the relationship our clients have with their customers.

That’s right. How could I have forgotten that calling people three or four times a day and threatening them with lawsuits and wage garnishment was page one out of the Mediator’s Handbook.

Not a good way to start a Friday…

I entered the kitchen this morning and saw the light blinking on the answering machine. Which was unusual for 2 reasons: First, nobody calls us on that line because between the wife and me, we have 6 phone numbers – 1 business line each, 1 cell phone each, a fax number and the old house line. Second, I don’t recall hearing the phone ring.

I press play.

Hello this is Mrs. X from BigBank Fraud Protection. I’m calling for Chris or Melissa Love (long story short, the wife kept her maiden name). I have some questions about some activity.

Now, this was disturbing for three reasons. First, my name isn’t Mr. Love and people I do business with would know that, so I am immediately on alert that this is some kind of “phishing” exercise. Second, I don’t bank at this particular bank. Third, my wife had her identity stolen by an illegal alien, who then got a phone line in her apartment and cable TV, paid the bill timely for a few months then skipped out on the last 2-3 months. Nothing too major, but still disturbing. On the plus side, the woman probably used it to get a job, so somebody paid Social Security taxes into her account.

After calling the main number for BigBank to find the Fraud department and speaking to a very helpful person there, I verified that the caller was a real fraud investigator and left her a message. Turns out that no fraud was perpetrated on me or my wife. But the reason she was calling was just as bizarre and disturbing.

She called to ask me if I had used MY bank’s online bill pay system to write a rather large check to a family member. This family member banks at the BigBank and they could not find record of a deposit into the family member’s account. Turns out the family member endorsed it over to their business and deposited it into that business account. Even though the family member is an officer and signatory on that account, the bank red flagged it.

I’m all for greater security, but I’m a little disturbed to know that the banks monitor our activity so closely. And where was all this fancy monitoring when the illegal alien used my wife’s social security number to open accounts in LAS VEGAS – 1500 miles from where we live?