Consider the Potential Benefits of Mediation or the Appointment of a Referee During the COVID-19 Pandemic
In their Trusts and Estates column, Raymond Radigan and Lois Bladykas write: The use of a mediator during this time of "social distancing" is possible through video and other electronic means, and if matters are resolved, the burden on the court system will be reduced.
May 01, 2020 at 12:00 PM
4 minute read
With New York state "on pause" for the foreseeable future, many practitioners are coming up with creative ways to service their clients during the COVID-19 pandemic, while maintaining safe "social distancing" protocols and ensuring the health of our colleagues and clients. Our ability to service our clients, particularly in the trusts and estates field, is even more significant now that New Yorkers and individuals across the world are faced with uncertainty about their health, finances, and their ability to provide for their families.
As nearly all practitioners will know, pursuant to the Administrative Order of the Chief Administrative Judge of the Courts Lawrence K. Marks, dated March 22, 2020, the New York state court system has closed many of its functions, and no new filings shall be accepted except in matters deemed "essential," the definition of which varies by court and practice area. On April 13, 2020, Judge Marks expanded the court system's operations to allow for "virtual" access to courts in existing matters, including the ability to conduct conferences and hearings by Skype or telephone. Courts have also been authorized to move pending matters forward by deciding pending motions.
This expansion of practitioners' and litigants' access to the courts is significant and will hopefully reduce the strain on the court system, which will undoubtedly occur when new filings are permitted and practitioners file many papers and new proceedings at once. In addition to the important and helpful expansion of "virtual courts," parties and litigators alike should consider retaining mediators and requesting the appointment of referees in existing litigated matters, to bring cases to resolution and move discovery along, to the extent possible.
In contested Surrogate's Court matters, the use of a mediator during this time of "social distancing" is possible through video and other electronic means, and if matters are resolved, the burden on the court system will be reduced. Throughout the state, Surrogate's Courts have implemented plans for presumptive, early alternative dispute resolution. Before the pandemic, many Surrogates appointed private attorneys, retired Surrogates, and retired court staff to mediate matters, with much success. Mediation sessions, like court conferences and hearings, may be conducted virtually, via telephone, Skype, Zoom or the like. Parties and counsel should consider whether now is an appropriate time to retain a private mediator, or request that the Surrogate appoint a mediator, if available through the court.
In addition to mediation, parties and counsel should consider whether the appointment of a referee pursuant to SCPA 506 would benefit their case at this time. Pursuant to SCPA 506, in any proceeding (other than a probate proceeding, a proceeding where a constitutional right to trial by jury exists and is demanded, or in an accounting proceeding where the estate is valued at $1,000 or less or the objections filed do not aggregate more than $200), the Surrogate may appoint a referee to hear and report to the court upon questions of fact or upon the law and facts. The court may also appoint a referee to supervise disclosure in an existing proceeding, where appropriate, pursuant to CPLR 3104. Like mediation sessions, sessions with a court-appointed referee could be conducted telephonically or virtually, giving parties and counsel the opportunity to advance their cases and reduce the backlog of cases that continues to accrue.
Some Surrogates have appointed retired Surrogates and others to act as mediators, and if the mediation is not initially successful, the mediator may then act as a referee with respect to disclosure. Pursuant to CPLR 3104, the parties may stipulate to, or the court may appoint, the mediator/referee to supervise disclosure until the matter is ready for trial. At that time, the mediator may ask the parties to resume the mediation and attempt to reach a compromise again, with the benefit of the parties having completed discovery and having disclosure of the relevant facts of the case.
The New York State court system, like all businesses and organizations throughout the state, has been significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The appointment of a mediator or referee in contested Surrogate's Court proceedings is just one of the ways that practitioners may manage their caseload during these unprecedented times, with the added benefit of reducing the burden on the courts.
Raymond Radigan is a former Surrogate of Nassau County and of counsel to Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C. He also chaired the Advisory Committee to the Legislature on Estates, Powers and Trusts Law and the Surrogate's Court Procedure Act. Lois Bladykas is an associate at the firm. Her practice focuses on trust and estate litigation.
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 All'So Many Firms' Have Yet to Announce Associate Bonuses, Underlining Big Law's Uneven Approach
5 minute readTik Tok’s ‘Blackout Challenge’ Confronts the Limits of CDA Section 230 Immunity
6 minute readEnemy of the State: Foreign Sovereign Immunity and Criminal Prosecutions after ‘Halkbank’
10 minute readGovernment Attorneys Are Flooding the Job Market, But Is There Room in Big Law?
4 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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