Sonora, CA The Tuolumne County Superior Court is in the discussion stages of implementing a new ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution Program.
Under consideration is the value of mediation in the schools, the police & sheriff deparments for civil matters and and in the courts with both small claims and civil matters.
Jim W Hildreth a Sonora based mediator is actively partispating in the dialog and with his experiences on being a member of other court panels as to the value of mediation with local conflicts and disputes.
Hildreths speciality are matters concerning real estate dsiputes.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Sacramento Law Libary
Jim W Hildreth Real Estae Mediator had the opportunity to improve his mediation skills by attending the Sacramento County Public Law Library course on Alternatiive Dispute Resolution-Mediation & Settlement Conference Programs in the Sacramento Superior Court.
The course was taught by the Honorable Michael G Vigra, on January 30, 2009
The class outlined the history of ADR in the Sacarmento Superior Court and the value of Mediation on all unlimited cases.
The course will be valuable to Hildreth as he does Mediation as as a "Neutral" in the courts of Amador, Calaveras & Merced Counties along with private mediations.
His speciality are disputes involving real estate.
The course was taught by the Honorable Michael G Vigra, on January 30, 2009
The class outlined the history of ADR in the Sacarmento Superior Court and the value of Mediation on all unlimited cases.
The course will be valuable to Hildreth as he does Mediation as as a "Neutral" in the courts of Amador, Calaveras & Merced Counties along with private mediations.
His speciality are disputes involving real estate.
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Monday, December 22, 2008
UC Berkeley
Real Estate Disputes happen, but there is an alternative to litigation.
Non- disclosure issues, buyer seller disputes, agent disputes, construction defects, landlord, tenant issues are all challenges that may arise in a dispute.
In the past, the first reaction was to file a law suit and the old saying is than in litigation, the "Attorneys" are the winners.
For those who enter the legal system it can be time consuming, it is costly and can be stressful.
There is an alternative, which may be quicker, less expensive, private, confidential and its called mediation.
All California Association of Realtors (CAR) forms call out that in a dispute "Mediation" is built in as the first alternative in a dispute.
Mediation is a process in which two or more people involved in a dispute come together to try to find a fair and workable solution. They accomplish this through a mediator or a neutral third party who is trained in conflict resolution.
The homeowners came together to remodel a home, however their partnership dissolved during the remodel and the financial stress and emotions of a breakup were a major challenge.
The non-disclosure of past plumbing problems and the future cost of repair for the new homeowners vs a lawsuit.
Easement issues that prevented a future building site.
The non-disclosure by agents that the home had dual pane windows and the new buyer discovered they were only single pane windows.
The above issues were mediated and settled quickly and without long term litigation.
Use of mediation in resolving disputes is supported by the California Association of Realtors, many California Courts have a ADR program that can guide the parties to assist in resolving the real estate dispute.
Hildreth offers dispute resolution that is both cost effective, confidential and private and offers his service to the Bay Area, Central Valley & Mother Lode.
Hildreth also serves on multiple Superior Courts as a civil mediator
Jim W Hildreth, Real Estate Mediator
Real Estate Mediation Services
www.RealEstateMediation.org
(209) 536-1103
Non- disclosure issues, buyer seller disputes, agent disputes, construction defects, landlord, tenant issues are all challenges that may arise in a dispute.
In the past, the first reaction was to file a law suit and the old saying is than in litigation, the "Attorneys" are the winners.
For those who enter the legal system it can be time consuming, it is costly and can be stressful.
There is an alternative, which may be quicker, less expensive, private, confidential and its called mediation.
All California Association of Realtors (CAR) forms call out that in a dispute "Mediation" is built in as the first alternative in a dispute.
Mediation is a process in which two or more people involved in a dispute come together to try to find a fair and workable solution. They accomplish this through a mediator or a neutral third party who is trained in conflict resolution.
The homeowners came together to remodel a home, however their partnership dissolved during the remodel and the financial stress and emotions of a breakup were a major challenge.
The non-disclosure of past plumbing problems and the future cost of repair for the new homeowners vs a lawsuit.
Easement issues that prevented a future building site.
The non-disclosure by agents that the home had dual pane windows and the new buyer discovered they were only single pane windows.
The above issues were mediated and settled quickly and without long term litigation.
Use of mediation in resolving disputes is supported by the California Association of Realtors, many California Courts have a ADR program that can guide the parties to assist in resolving the real estate dispute.
Hildreth offers dispute resolution that is both cost effective, confidential and private and offers his service to the Bay Area, Central Valley & Mother Lode.
Hildreth also serves on multiple Superior Courts as a civil mediator
Jim W Hildreth, Real Estate Mediator
Real Estate Mediation Services
www.RealEstateMediation.org
(209) 536-1103
Old Superior Court, Calaveras, County, CA
Alternative Dispute Resolution Advantages of Mediation, it Increases
control Over the Process and the Outcome:
In ADR, parties typically play a greater role in shaping both the process and its outcome. In ADR, parties have the opportunity to tell their side of the story just as they do at trial. Some ADR processes, such as mediation, allow the parties to fashion creative resolutions that may not be available in a trial. Other ADR processes, such as arbitration, allow the parties to choose a qualified person or
expert in a particular field to decide the dispute.
control Over the Process and the Outcome:
In ADR, parties typically play a greater role in shaping both the process and its outcome. In ADR, parties have the opportunity to tell their side of the story just as they do at trial. Some ADR processes, such as mediation, allow the parties to fashion creative resolutions that may not be available in a trial. Other ADR processes, such as arbitration, allow the parties to choose a qualified person or
expert in a particular field to decide the dispute.
Friday, December 19, 2008
Mediation "Win-Win" vs Litigation
Mediation is a flexible dispute resolution system that can be used to resolve virtually any type of dispute. Mediation enables the parties to work together and keeps them in control of the decision making process (and usually free from lawyers, judges, arbitrators, or inflexible laws, court rules and procedures). Since mediation is nonadversarial, it also allows the parties to achieve a "win-win" outcome, in contrast to the winner-and-loser scenarios associated with litigation and arbitration. Another advantage of mediation is that it is a private and confidential process; the discussions and agreements resulting from the mediation are not part of a public record as they are in litigation.
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Mediation Fee Update California
Trial Court Correctly Awarded Attorney's Fees To Winning Litigant In Arbitration Even Though Mediation Was Not First Attempted
Second District, Division Three Affirms Fee Award Because Contractual Fee Provision Did Not Absolutely Bar Recovery For a Failure to Mediate.
In past posts of May 30, 2008 on Lange v. Schilling and June 13, 2008 on Casillas v. Westhaven, LLC, we discussed California Association of Realtors (CAR) real estate purchase agreement forms that have a provision conditioning an award of attorney's fees on attempting to mediate before going to court or invoking arbitration rights. The appellate courts construe these clauses strictly, with Justice Fybel's decision in Frei v. Davey, 124 Cal.App.4th 1506, 1520 (2004) being one of the most cited decisions for enforcing the mediation condition precedent provisions. However, as with many disputes, "the devil is in the details"—the wording of the contractual fee clause can make all the difference in the world, as the next case illustrates.
Dewey v. Higgins, Case No. B200661 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 21, 2008) (unpublished) involved two in pro per litigants, a real estate agent and the affiliate real estate broker. Both parties agreed to arbitrate two lawsuits brought by broker against agent arising from unrelated disputes involving a commission agreement and trust deed. Agent eventually won the arbitration, with the award being confirmed as a judgment and broker ordered by the superior court to pay agent $24,584 in attorney's fees and $4,127 in costs. Broker challenged the fee award, arguing the failure to initiate mediation disqualified agent from recovering fees.
Not so, ruled the Court of Appeal,
The contractual fees clause was different from the CAR form, providing that fee entitlement was in jeopardy for not attempting mediation first "in the discretion of the arbitrator(s) or judge." The key discretionary language was what allowed the lower court to award fees even though mediation was not initiated. The fee award against broker was affirmed based on this crucial difference.
Article posted on www.calttorneyfees.com
Second District, Division Three Affirms Fee Award Because Contractual Fee Provision Did Not Absolutely Bar Recovery For a Failure to Mediate.
In past posts of May 30, 2008 on Lange v. Schilling and June 13, 2008 on Casillas v. Westhaven, LLC, we discussed California Association of Realtors (CAR) real estate purchase agreement forms that have a provision conditioning an award of attorney's fees on attempting to mediate before going to court or invoking arbitration rights. The appellate courts construe these clauses strictly, with Justice Fybel's decision in Frei v. Davey, 124 Cal.App.4th 1506, 1520 (2004) being one of the most cited decisions for enforcing the mediation condition precedent provisions. However, as with many disputes, "the devil is in the details"—the wording of the contractual fee clause can make all the difference in the world, as the next case illustrates.
Dewey v. Higgins, Case No. B200661 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 21, 2008) (unpublished) involved two in pro per litigants, a real estate agent and the affiliate real estate broker. Both parties agreed to arbitrate two lawsuits brought by broker against agent arising from unrelated disputes involving a commission agreement and trust deed. Agent eventually won the arbitration, with the award being confirmed as a judgment and broker ordered by the superior court to pay agent $24,584 in attorney's fees and $4,127 in costs. Broker challenged the fee award, arguing the failure to initiate mediation disqualified agent from recovering fees.
Not so, ruled the Court of Appeal,
The contractual fees clause was different from the CAR form, providing that fee entitlement was in jeopardy for not attempting mediation first "in the discretion of the arbitrator(s) or judge." The key discretionary language was what allowed the lower court to award fees even though mediation was not initiated. The fee award against broker was affirmed based on this crucial difference.
Article posted on www.calttorneyfees.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
