Friday, January 19

How wrong can you get?

In Time for Two Strangers to Meet (no link but at 21 Ohio St. J. On Disp. Resol, 569, 2006), the Honorable John C. Cratsley proposed a rule that would prohibit any judge directly involved with mediation or settlement efforts from presiding over that case at trial if settlement attempts didn't work out.

Sounds sensible, and obvious. And avoids blurring the lines.

Responding to Cratsley's article, the Honorable Dan Aaron Polster argues in The Trial Judge as Mediator that a judge who takes an active role in mediation or settlement activities should not be barred from trying the case, assuming it would be a jury trial.

An interesting debate and one that we should be concerned about.

No comments: