Margaret Huff Mediation|Top Mediator|Arbitrator|Workplace Conflict Management|ADR TN

Margaret

Huff

Mediation

Listen. . . Communicate. . .

Move to Solutions.

____________________________________________________________________________

Margaret Huff Mediation PO Box 121951 Nashville TN 37212-1951

____________________________________________________________________________

Margaret M. ("Marnie") Huff

custom designed alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services for businesses, organizations, and individuals in Tennessee

client-centered conflict resolution services: mediation, arbitration, collaborative problem solving, and consulting on workplace conflict management

Read more about the Nashville TN ADR firm, Margaret Huff Mediation.

Contact Marnie at 615-812-5557 or email Margaret Huff Mediation.

ADR News and Reports, a selection of national, state and local news of interest to Tennessee attorneys, mediators and arbitrators.

On October 3, 2018, the Tennessee Supreme Court ordered significant amendments to Rule 31 governing Tennessee mediators, adopted Rule 31A, and posted certain forms on the Tennessee Administrative Office of the Court's website. The Court filed an Appendix detailing the changes.

The Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility has addressed confidentiality provisions in settlement agreements. Tennessee Rule of Professional Conduct 5.6(b) provides, "A lawyer shall not participate in offering of making: (b) an agreement in which a restriction on the lawyer's right to practice is part of the settlement of a client controversy." Accordingly, if it restricts a lawyer's representation of other clients, it is improper for a lawyer to propose or accept a settlement agreement with a confidentiality provision that prohibits a lawyer from future use of information learned during the representation of a client, disclosure of publicly available information, or disclosure of information available through discovery in other cases. Formal Ethics Opinion 2018-F-166.

In Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, No. 16–285, ___ U.S. ___ (May 21, 2018), an employment contract provided for individualized arbitration proceedings to resolve employment disputes between the parties. The employees tried to litigate Fair Labor Standards Act and related state law claims through class or collective actions in federal court. They argued that the Federal Arbitration Act’s “saving clause” enabled them to pursue their suits because the arbitration agreement violated federal law. That is, by requiring individualized proceedings, the employment contracts violated the National Labor Relations Act. In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that, under the FAA, arbitration agreements providing for individualized proceedings must be enforced. The FAA’s saving clause and the NLRA do not suggest otherwise.

Do clients prefer negotiation, mediation, non-binding arbitration, binding arbitration, jury trials, or judge trials? Law professor Donna Shetowsky finds that litigants prefer mediation, judge trials, and attorney negotiations with the clients present. Read Shetowsky's law review article, The Psychology of Procedural Preference: How Litigants Evaluate Legal Procedures Ex Ante.

A resource on planned early dispute resolution (PEDR) for mediators, negotiators and their clients is the webpage created by the ABA Section of Dispute Resolution's PEDR Task Force. The webpage includes a link to a Planned Early Dispute Resolution User Guide.

Public Service Announcements on mediation: Check out these ABA Section of Dispute Resolution public service announcements on "Mediation. Efficient. Effective. Economical." - "Play Nice" and "Equal Levels."

For details and more ADR news and reports, go to our web pages on ADR News/Reports and TN ADR Caselaw Update.