Please Beat Up My/Their Clients: A Discussion of the Relative Merits of Mediation and Judicial Settlement Conferences
Presented by U.S. District Court Southern District of New York
About the Event
Judicial settlement conferences and mediation are two of the ways in which litigants work to settle cases. These two processes are different in important ways – though they are often conflated by both neutrals and consumers. Some participants, for example, believe that judges have greater leverage than non-judicial mediators whose role is to facilitate without express authority to make determinations. Others believe that non-judicial mediators are advantaged by their non-decision-making role. To add to this blurring of processes, while it is optimal for neutrals of all kinds to conform their practices to the needs of a particular case, some judges are largely facilitative in their approach to settlement assistance while some mediators employ a highly evaluative style (either because of their own preferences or at the request of parties). In this panel discussion with experienced counsel, mediators, and a former judge, we aim to explore meaningful similarities and differences between judicial settlement conferences and non-judicial mediation. We will also consider when counsel may wish to incorporate aspects of one process into the other (e.g., confidentiality), to identify general criteria for deciding which process is more suited to a particular matter, to highlight strategic differences in advocacy, and to explore ethical issues related to both processes.
RSVP by 9/17 to email@example.com
Featured JAMS Speaker
Stephen P. Sonnenberg, Esq.
CLE Credit Pending -1.0 Areas of Professional Practice and 0.5 Ethics and Professionalism
Date / Time
Tuesday, September 25, 2018
U.S. District Court SDNY