As a litigator turned full-time Accredited Professional Mediator, and having served on the Supreme Court Committee for Complementary Dispute Resolution, I agree with the Oct. 31 editorial that the “Mandatory Mediation Program Needs Improvements to Thrive.”
The Supreme Court Committee, however, directly addressed some of the specific complaints cited in the editorial, which resulted in 2011 and 2015 Amendments to R.1:40 et seq. The amended rules significantly enhanced the value of court-ordered mediations by giving the mediator and counsel great latitude in case management and in scheduling:
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
