From the Blog of Phyllis G. Pollack.
In 1990, a California appellate court held that “absolute quasi-judicial immunity is properly extended to neutral third persons who are engaged in mediation, conciliation, evaluation or similar dispute resolution efforts.” Howard v. Drapkin (1990) 222 Cal. App. 3d 843, 851-860.( 222_cal__app__3d_843)
Recently, California Assembly Member James T. Beall, Jr. introduced AB 2475 (ab_2475 ) which would abolish such quasi-judicial immunity not only in all court ordered mediations but in those held privately, as well, It is rumored that the genesis of this draft legislation was a family law matter that went awry. That is, as rumor has it, a family law evaluator (not a mediator) submitted substantive written recommendations to the court which adopted them. The consequences were disastrous for the family who sued the evaluator but lost due to this quasi-judicial immunity.
In an attempt to correct the “problem,” Assembly Member Beall drafted this legislation which, “throws the baby out with the bath water.”
Because of the importance of this issue, I want to share with you, the letter I wrote as President of the Southern California Mediation Association to Assembly Member Beall opposing this legislation. ( letter)
As the issue affects not only mediators but parties to a dispute, (mediations are liable to become a lot less available), I urge each of you to write Assembly Member Beall and make your voice and thoughts known.
. . .Just something to think about.
Peter Salem has been with the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) since 1994, first as the Associate Director and since 2002, as the Executive Director. He has been...By Peter Salem
This essay is inspired by Sigmund Freud’s persuasive, imaginative and enigmatic writings on mental processes and their meanings. He was the founder of psychoanalysis and is psychology's most famous author....By Luis Miguel Diaz