Legal News

L.A. bar opposes controversial resolution to pay mediators who work with local courts

By Jason Siegel

The board of the Los Angeles County Bar Association recently voted to oppose a controversial resolution to pay mediators who have been providing free services to the local courts.

The resolution, put forward by the Beverly Hills Bar Association, would change a section of the state's Code of Civil Procedure to require the parties in a lawsuit to pay for a mediator. Current law states that mediators should be paid out of the state's budget, but those funds have long deteriorated. As a result, most mediators provide the first three hours of their services for free.

The Conference of Delegates of California State Bar Associations, which is made up of geographical state bars throughout the state, is anticipated to take up the resolution at its annual meeting this weekend in Monterey, Calif. If supported, the resolution could go before the state legislature.

Charles Parselle, a member of the resolutions committee at the Beverly Hills Bar Association, who has been pushing for the change for years, said this is the first time the resolution has come before the conference.

"There's nothing to prevent people from choosing a private mediator and paying them at the present time. But an enormous number of cases simply get sent out and mediators essentially pay for the first three hours," he said. "This proposal says that instead of this three-hour freebie, it's much better to put mediators on the same footing as everybody else and let them charge for services."

He noted that the resolution would not apply in cases in which the parties have been subject to a court order for mediation.

But last week, by a 21-4 vote, the board of the Los Angeles County Bar Association opposed the idea, mostly because "this is a critical piece of what supports the administration of justice in the L.A. county courts," said Clark Brown, general counsel of the Los Angeles County Bar Association.

Without providing some free services, the courts would experience a backlog of cases, he said.

He also noted that several other lawyers, such as those who serve as judges pro tem, volunteer their time without requesting to be paid.

"If someone doesn't want to provide three hours free, they don't have to," Brown said. "But right now, the court needs that support."

-- Amanda Bronstad

Full post as published by Legal Pad | LA on September 25, 2008 (boomark / email).