Reference no: EM133731767
Case: A. Confidentiality in Mediation. Olam (p. 212) was a significant court ruling addressing the question of the extent of mediator confidentiality.
a. Summarize the primary factual issue that was in dispute.
b. Summarize the central holding of the case.
c. Do you agree with the outcome of the case? Why or why not?
d. Is the ruling in Olam consistent with NLRB v. Macaluso (p. 182)? Why or why not?
e. Would the outcome in Olam have been the same if the relevant provisions of the UMA had been the law governing confidentiality in mediation? Why or why not? Be certain to cite the specific provisions in the UMA that support your answer.
B. Justice in Mediation
1. Delgado (p. 291) warns that ADR (mediation in particular) presents dangers because there are not significant protections that curb potentially prejudicial behavior by the party participants or the mediator.
Describe and explain the central elements of Delgado's analysis.
2. Press and Deason (305) discuss the impact of embedded assumptions of whiteness in mediator practice.
a. Identify and briefly explain two mediator practices that Press/Deason believe reflect embedded assumptions of whiteness.
b. For each practice discussed in (a), would the Press/Deason analysis be consistent with Delgado's recommended practices for curbing the impact of racial prejudice in the conduct of a mediation session? Explain your response.
3. Tafoya (p. 280) and Batts (p. 282) share autobiographical perspectives that reflect how their feelings of exclusion from engagement with the dominant culture has shaped their thinking and practice of mediation. Based on their insights, (i) identify and (ii) explain two (2) mediator practices in conducting a mediation session that you believe would minimize, if not eliminate, a party's feeling of exclusion from the conversation.
C. In his article, Mediation and Adjudication, Dispute Resolution and Ideology: An Imaginary Conversation (p. 390), Professor Bush envisions a judge who has been empowered by a state statute to refer cases from their civil docket to mediation. The statute says that the judge, in their discretion, can refer any and all cases: they can send all cases to mediation on a blanket basis, only certain categories of cases, or individual cases on a case-by-case basis, whichever they decide. The judge is uncertain how to exercise this new power and asks four individuals for their advice about how to proceed.
1. Summarize the advice - that is, the policy and mediation conceptions - provided to the judge by: a) the law professor and (b) the mediator.
2. What advice would you give the judge? Support your answer with appropriate reference to the analyses of the four "advisors" as well as materials and resources examined during the course.
D. Mediator Orientations.
a. Describe and explain the central elements of the original Riskin Grid (136-40).
b. In the debate between Susskind and Stulberg regarding mediator accountability (122-32):
i. Is Susskind's approach to mediation captured anywhere on the Riskin grid? If yes, describe what label from Riskin you would ascribe to him and why. If not, explain why.
ii. Is Stulberg's approach to mediation captured anywhere on the Riskin grid? If yes, describe what label from Riskin you would ascribe to him and why. If not, explain why.