Resources / Study / Innovation for Court ADR

Just Court ADR

The blog of Resolution Systems Institute

Archive for 2013

RSI Celebrates Professor Katheryn Dutenhaver at Conflict Resolution Day

Just Court ADR, October 21st, 2013

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA Resolution Systems Institute presented our Harris H. Agnew Service to Community Award to Professor Katheryn Dutenhaver at ACR Chicago’s Conflict Resolution Day.

The award is presented to individuals whose cumulative activities have substantially and meaningfully furthered and enhanced court ADR systems in Illinois. For 2013, we honored Professor Dutenhaver with a plaque that reads as follows:

“Professor Dutenhaver is a pioneer in the ADR field. She began teaching mediation to law students in 1986 and by the next year, her students were mediating small claims cases – some of the first students in the nation to do so. The success of this program led Professor Dutenhaver to co-found the Center for Dispute Resolution at DePaul University. Other Chicago law schools have followed in her footsteps by offering such opportunities to students. (more…)

In re Lee Part 1: A Child’s Best Interest Comes Second to Mediation Finality

Just Court ADR, October 9th, 2013

The mediation policy and ethics questions encountered in the recent Texas Supreme Court decision In re Lee are enough to fill several blog posts. Over the next few posts, we’ll look at the many policy implications of this remarkable decision. Topics discussed will include:

  • Should the finality of a mediated agreement trump changes for the child’s best interest?
  • In custody policy, do mediation and arbitration differ?
  • When there’s been no intimate partner violence, should settlements be irrevocable?
  • Who decides potential endangerment to a child?
  • What can judges do when parents in mediation act against their child’s interest?
  • When a mediated agreement sets rules over non-parties, what governs their enforcement?

(more…)

Illinois Supreme Court Increases Reporting Requirements for Family Mediation

Jennifer Shack, September 24th, 2013

Anyone who knows RSI knows that we’re all about data. We believe that courts need good data about their programs in order to make good decisions about them. That’s why we were thrilled when the Illinois Supreme Court Committee on Child Custody Issues asked for our help in developing a mediator report and participant survey that will be used statewide for family mediation. We’re even more thrilled that those forms have been adopted and will be required by the Supreme Court. This is part of the Court’s amendments to Rule 905, which went into effect September 1.

The rule, which governs child custody and visitation mediation, now requires that every judicial circuit file a quarterly report with the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts that includes “the number of custody, visitation and removal cases referred to mediation; the outcome of such a referral; number of cases referred on a pro bono basis; and the percentage of cases where the parties expressed satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the process.”  The information will be used for what we love best at RSI – review of the mediation program statewide.

A more substantive change in the rule expands mandatory mediation to include a custodial parent’s request to remove a child to another state. It also requires the courts to make a “good faith” effort to provide an interpreter when a non-English speaking parent is involved in mediation and to provide a pro bono attorney when applicable.

Is Getting It in Writing a Universal Best Practice?

Susan M. Yates, August 29th, 2013

The New Jersey Supreme Court recently ruled that agreement terms must be written and signed before the parties leave a mediation in order to be enforced. Experienced mediators are familiar with the push-pull at the end of a long mediation of whether to write up an agreement. On one hand, everyone wants to be done with the mediation and go home. On the other hand, writing enough so that the agreement is clear, and then signing that agreement, can forestall major problems down the line. Now, at least in New Jersey, what should be done is clear: if the terms are not written and signed, it will not be considered an enforceable agreement. (more…)

Verified by ExactMetrics