Judgment Day - Part 4

The Mediator

Because the action was started out of Toronto, we have to endure what is known as “Mandatory Mediation”.  So we have to travel to downtown Toronto so the parties can attempt to “mediate”. 

Let me say this…. mediation is a good thing….usually.  But there has to be some willingness on both parties to settle.  Otherwise it is just an expensive road trip.

Prior to going to a mediation, the parties deliver a “mediation brief” setting out their respective positions.  The other lawyer takes the position that the specific section in the Statute of Frauds that I rely on (Section 4 for anyone who looks these things up) is not applicable.  But no sensible, logical, or even remotely plausible basis is made for this position.

Off to Toronto we go.

We meet with the mediator.  What follows, and I say this with all due consideration, is the most highly inappropriate conduct by a mediator that I have ever experienced.  In order to try to convince my client to pay money, the mediator says “I have a friend who is a law professor and he agrees with the other lawyer’s view on the Statute of Frauds”, and, in particular Section 4. 

So based on this random, unnamed authority, this so called mediator expects me to recommend a settlement to my client.  This is nuts.  If this fellow wants me to accept such a position, he better show me a real authority.

After it becomes clear that we are not going to bite, he and the other lawyer try to take another approach.  They suggest that the adult son (who has since filed for bankruptcy) could be challenged on the bankruptcy if Mom does not come up with some coin.

I put a quick halt to this and tell both of them, and in particular this so called mediator, to back off.  If they want to challenge the son’s bankruptcy, they are free to do so.  But they are not to try and extort my client with that threat.  The good news is that when I let my client know of this little gambit, she required no coaching or advice from me.  She rejected it out of hand and recognized it immediately as being inappropriate.

The only one who didn’t recognize this as being improper was this so-called mediator.  His response?  “I have been a mediator since 1985 and you should listen to me” (or words to that effect).

The mediation ended without a resolution.

More to follow……..