Courthouse to Conference Room: Transitioning From the Bench to Private Mediator
Larry S. Schachner of NAM's (National Arbitration and Mediation) writes: Private mediation allows cases to be resolved more quickly, more efficiently, with greater cost-effectiveness and with the parties maintaining greater control of the outcome, than allowing your case to slowly meander through the different stages of the court system's litigation maze.
August 08, 2017 at 12:00 AM
6 minute read
I have been engaged in the practice of private mediation for only a few months, but already feel like it is the most logical and exciting continuance of my 30-year judicial career. I was a proud employee of the court system, first as a law secretary to Supreme Court Justice Howard R. Silver and then as a judge myself. I have served in four different courts: Housing, Civil, Criminal and Supreme. By far, my most enjoyable time on the bench was mediating cases with an eye towards settlement. I believe my time as both a law secretary and as a judge was the perfect training ground for my career as a private mediator. I look at my new journey in ADR/private mediation as a natural next step in my judicial career and I'm happy to have the opportunity to work at NAM (National Arbitration and Mediation).
As a law secretary for Justice Silver during the 1990s, my fondest memories are the many cases I settled in the “STP Part,” earning the nickname “Judge Larry” from the attorneys who appeared before me. In those days, private mediation was a rarity. Today, it's the norm. While on the bench, I handled a wide variety of cases, from those involving pro-se litigants to more complex litigation such as labor law, toxic torts, medical malpractice, premises liability, civil rights, municipal liability and motor vehicle negligence. While I tried my share of cases, I believe my biggest strength as a judge has always been my ability to bring parties together to resolve issues and settle disputes.
Over the years, I have seen firsthand how difficult it has become for lawyers to get their cases tried. There are many reasons why this has occurred but, in my opinion, the number one reason is that there are an insufficient number of judges available to try cases. While this problem has gotten worse, it has also been exacerbated by the Office of Court Administration (OCA) budget cuts. A judge needs a courtroom and a staff to conduct a trial. In recent years, budget constraints have seen court clerks retire and not be replaced. In the Bronx Supreme Court, the Law Department was stripped bare. The loss of experienced clerks and court attorneys in the court system has created a brain drain and shortage of essential resources. Another reason why resolving litigation faces inordinate delays is that certain cases sit in a holding pattern while summary judgment motions are pending. In some of those instances, litigants wait six months or sometimes up to a year or more for a decision to be rendered. Certainly, this is not fair to the parties as it prevents a case from being fully evaluated, settled, or sent out to trial. These issues will not be solved overnight, despite the best of intentions of court administrators.
New Career, New Observations
The problems that I left behind in the court system are now in my rearview mirror as I embark on my new career. I'd like to share a few observations which I've made in my first few months as a neutral. First and foremost, private mediation is much more civilized and efficient than a settlement conference in court. Instead of waiting around in a courtroom with a hundred other attorneys to have your case called for a five-minute conference, mediation allows you to manage your time more efficiently. In private mediation, you have a solid block of time to discuss your case with a mediator who is solely focused on your claim. While on the bench I learned to multitask quite effectively, conferencing a case, signing a discovery order or subpoena, conferring with my court attorney on a legal issue and checking to see if I'd be allowed to send any cases out for jury selection, all at once. Now, as a private mediator, I am laser-focused on the matter before me and can get into greater detail, analyzing all of the relevant issues. While I occasionally miss the organized chaos of the courtroom, I am quickly getting used to the pace, structure and dialogue of private mediation.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllNYU Settles Antisemitism Suit, as Kasowitz Pushes Other Universities to 'Follow Their Lead'
Updated Rules for New York's Commercial Division: Technology Disputes and Use of Referees
9 minute readFederal Jurisdiction Over Petitions To Confirm, Vacate Arbitration Awards Uncertain After 'Badgerow'
8 minute readMLBPA Seeks to Enforce Arbitration Agreement Against Bad Bunny's Sports Agency
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 2A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 3Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
- 4State Bar of Georgia Presents Access to Justice Pro Bono Awards
- 5Tips For Creating Holiday Plans That Everyone Can Be Grateful For
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250