I. INTRODUCTION
Mediation has become an effective and popular form of dispute resolution since the last decade. Specifically, from 2005 to 2008 in Georgia, there were 523 settlements through mediation from 763 total cases. Under this informal process, mediator as a third and neutral party encouraged a broad ranging discussion of facts, feelings, issues, underlying interests, and possible solutions to the parties’ conflict. Moreover, mediation referred to the philosophy that the parties voluntarily reached any agreement through a process of cooperation and compromise without declaring the winner and the loser.
Mediation privilege for protecting mediation communications is one of the key factors of the successful implementation of mediation. This privilege constructed that all parties can refuse to disclose mediation communications in discovery or as evidence. Further, these communications include all oral and written communications and conduct that occurs within the mediation proceeding, and parties prepared these communications for the purpose of, in the course of or pursuant to mediation. For parties, this privilege can enhance the quality and quantity of communications that subsequently improved the chances to reach an acceptable resolution to their dispute. It is because they can communicate honestly and frankly without worrying if what they say can be admitted in a subsequent proceeding, such as if the mediation fails. For mediators, this privilege can avail them in advancing negotiation process by revealing some sensitive communications.
However, mediation privilege for protecting mediation communications is not an absolute rule. Under certain circumstances, it will be no longer privilege if the b...
... middle of paper ...
...lly confessed that he has an affair with other woman. Then, the case go through the court because of the failure of settlement in mediation. Can wife request more portion of property than her husband because she argue that the divorce caused by her husband’s fault since he has an affair with other woman, and this fact is revealed in the mediation? Do the courts protect communication that contain the confession of husband in the mediation?
IV. CONCLUSION
In Washington Courts, mediation privilege always protects communications before, during, and after the mediation as long as they related and fostered the mediation process. Furthermore, all parties do not waive and preclude the privilege or communications are not subject to one of the exceptions to the privilege. Therefore, these communications are not discoverable or admissible in evidence in Washington Courts.
In this divorce case, we determine whether the evidence presented to the trial court sufficed to set aside a written property settlement agreement on the grounds of unconscionability and constructive fraud or duress. Sandra Derby argues that the trial court erred in holding the parties' separation agreement invalid since George Derby did not prove fraud, duress, or undue influence. She also argues that George Derby did not prove adultery by clear and convincing evidence and that the judge therefore erred in awarding Mr. Derby a divorce.
Regina is suing Stacy for divorce on the grounds of irreconcilable differences, Regina says “Stacy belittles her, because she wasn’t working” he says she let herself go, among other insults, Regina says she worked as a stripper, to provide for the family, when Stacy was unemployed. Stacy says Regina is materialistic, and throws fits, when she cannot purchase expensive things. Stacy says Regina has a “stank attitude” and she acts like a “hood rat”. Regina says it is comments like these like Stacy makes about her constantly, she says he is verbally abusive. Stacy says Regina admitted to having an affair, Regina says this was before the marriage, Stacy also admitted to a premarital affair, but neither has had an affair since being married. Regina has come to court asking for $2100 transitional alimony, the judge asked Stacy, how income he brought home after taxes he replied $400.00, weekly and the judge asked Regina the same question, she replied $300.00 weekly, the judge ordered Stacy to pay Regina $300 monthly for three months, and instructed the partied to forgive, let go of the anger, and be happy, now that the matter was settled, then she adjourned the case. I would mediated the case just a little differently, I would have let them vent, also I would have suggested they forgive and move on, but I would not have awarded the wife anything, I would have
One way of communicating with people and keeping them updated with information is through digital communication. Law firms consider this as a possible way to communicate with clients when handling their cases. However, mistakenly sent information can become an ethical issue. This is called “attorney-client privilege”, meaning the attorney has the duty to keep all confidential information of the client private. Although, attorneys deemed digital communication as a great method this information can be misdirected and shared with the opposing party.
Sue contracts with Tom to deliver a quantity of computers to Sue’s Computer Store. They disagree over the amount, the delivery date, the price, and the quality. Sue files a suit against Tom in a state court. Their state requires that their dispute be submitted to mediation or nonbinding arbitration. If the dispute is not resolved, or if either party disagrees with the decision of the mediator or arbitrator, will a court hear the case? Explain. (See Alternative Dispute Resolution.)
In general, mediation is directed by a neutral third party who can by what he had of skills and abilities focus on guiding the behaviors of the parties towards discussing the issues that need to be faced, while receiving separate and confidential communications from the parties until he reached a certain level of understanding with them that the conflict can be resolved.
Reimund, M.E. (2004). Confidentiality in Victim Offender Mediation: A False Promise. Journal of Dispute Resolution, 401-427.
Ott, Marvin C. "Mediation as a Method of Conflict Resolution: Two Cases." International Organization 26.04 (1972): 595-618. JSTOR. Web. 3 Dec. 2013.
Discussion that takes puts inside the connection of a protected relationship, for example, that between a lawyer and a client, a spouse and wife, a minister and contrite, and a physician physician and patient. The law frequently ensures against constrained exposure of such discussions. Be that as it may, there are special cases that can refute an advantaged correspondence, and there are different circumstances where it can be waived, either deliberately or accidentally.
In these instances, there have been different and conflicting decisions reached by the courts when determining the best protection for confidential and privileged communication. Some of the decisions have caused innocent people like Alton Logan to suffer for 26yrs for a crime he did not commit, on the other hand, the United States judicial system offers a strong defense as one of its basic tenets. This paper will review the attorney-client privilege and provide arguments for and against the continuation of such privilege. Attorney-client privilege is communication by a client to an attorney. However, utterance by an attorney does not make communication privileged, just as an attorney’s presence does not make communication in a room privileged.
Document ID: 671516321. Poitras, J. (2007). The 'Standard' of the 'Standard'. The Paradox of Accepting One's Share of Responsibility in Mediation. Negotiation Journal, 23(3), 267-282.
Alternative Dispute Resolution or ADR refers to a number of various processes that can be used to resolve legal disputes other than by litigation. Recently, methods of dispute resolution which focus on arbitration, mediation and negotiation as an alternative to adjudication have gained notoriety. This notoriety may have been caused by the public perception that ADR methods are less expensive, more efficient, and more satisfactory than the normal traditional course of litigation. The goals of establishing these processes to resolve disputes as an alternative to more formal legal processes include: 1) to make the regular court system more efficient, less costly and more responsive to the needs of the litigants; 2) to offer alternative methods of dispute resolution in addition to the regular court system; and 3) to provide public education about the available alternatives.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) involves dispute resolution processes and techniques that fall outside of the government judicial process. There has been moves against ADR in the past by entities of many political parties and their associates, despite this, ADR has gained inclusive acceptance among both the broad community and the legal profession in past years. In fact, many courts now entail some parties to remedy to ADR of some type, usually mediation, before allowing the parties' cases to be tried. The increasing attractiveness of ADR can be clarified by the increasing caseload of traditional courts, the perception that ADR imposes fewer costs than litigation, a preference for confidentiality, and the desire of some parties to obtain larger control over the selection of the individual or individuals who will decide their dispute.
Although functions of mediators and arbitrators have several characteristics in common, there are significant instrumental differences that make them distinct from one another. Firstly, whereas the arbitration process is similar to litigation in its adversarial nature, in which parties have the objective to win the dispute, the fundamental goal of mediation is to bring the disputants to settlement through compromise and cooperation without finding a guilty party. In arbitration, parties compete against each other in “win-lose” situation. During mediation, parties work on mutually acceptable conditions with the assistance of a facilitator. In this process, mediators do not have power to make decisions, they work to reconcile the competing needs and interests of involved parties. The mediator’s tasks are to assist disputants to identify, understand, and articulate their needs and interests to each other (Christopher W. Moore,
...sfied with the outcome and resolution from the mediation session, the parties are given liberties to engage with a court procedure.