A frequent question about mediation in Arizona is the cost.  One thing is certain:  mediation is almost always less expensive than litigation.  Because mediation can resolve conflicts quickly (generally taking hours instead of months or years), the

Arizona Mediation Cost

cost is naturally less.  Further, litigation is expensive because it includes:  (1) discovery (depositions, interrogatories, subpoenas and other formal requests for information); (2) an often frequent exchange of letters between attorneys to address issues and gather information; (3) retention of experts and interviews of potential witnesses; (4) preparation of exhibits and trial questions; and (5) actual time in court.  It is not unusual to spend $5,000.00 just in the week or two prior to trial and tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars for the whole litigation, depending on the matter litigated.

While attorneys and other professionals can be used in the mediation process, it is also possible to complete a mediation with one professional – the mediator.  What is more, the parties to a mediation generally share the cost of the mediator, thereby further reducing the cost.

The cost of the actual mediation varies depending on the amount of time you need to resolve your conflict.  Also, mediators charge a variety of different hourly rates.  Many trained mediators, including this author, charge around $250.00 per hour.

While you may be able to get a “discount” mediator, the old adage – you get what you pay for – often holds true.  In Arizona, anyone can call themselves a mediator – one does not need any training or skill to do so.  A bad mediator is frequently worse than no mediator at all.

Alona M. Gottfried is a mediator and attorney in Arizona.  If you have questions about mediation, she can be reached at: 480-998-1500 or alona(a)sglawaz.com.  You can also visit: Azmediator.com.  This is a general interest article only and is not intended to be legal advice.  See a legal professional before making legal decisions.

In Arizona, mediation is not a regulated field.  Someone who cannot even spell “mediation” can hang out a shingle and begin soliciting business.  Therefore, consumers need to beware.  As with any other field, both training and experience are important.  If you are looking for a mediator in Arizona, you want to make sure that your candidates have taken at least one 40 hour (or longer) mediation course.  You also may want to see what each candidate’s experience is with your particular issue.  For example, if you want to mediate an Arizona family law dispute, the mediator should have experience with the field.  Otherwise, he/she may not even know what issues need to be resolved in a particular type of family law action.

So how do you find a good mediator?  One option is to ask friends or family for a referral.  Another option is to search on line and carefully review the mediator’s credentials.  You can also ask for a consultation to meet with the mediator and get a sense of his/her style.  Mediators can range in style from “touchy-feely” to authoritative.  People respond to different styles.

If a mediator guarantees you success in the mediation, tries to offer you legal advice, acts biased toward one party or tells you are either going to definitely win or lose your action – then run.  Those are all signs of someone unqualified to mediate.

Resolving your dispute is very important, so it is worth the time to find a qualified mediator.

Alona M. Gottfried is a mediator and attorney in Arizona.  If you have questions about mediation, she can be reached at: 480-998-1500.  This is a general interest article only and is not intended to be legal advice.  See a legal professional before making legal decisions.

Simmons & Gottfried, PLLC.
a Professional Limited Liability Company
3977 N. 7th Street, Suite 340
Phoenix, AZ  85014-0001

In a perfect world there would be no disputes, and everyone would just get along.  The second best option is a world where all disputes would be settled by the mediation process.  The good news is that mediation works in most cases.  There are just a few situations where when mediation will not be an appropriate method to settle a conflict.

When Is Mediation Not Going To Work?

Mediation will not work if one or more parties refuses to participate in good faith. Mediation needs to be entered into voluntarily by all parties for it to be successful.  You can’t make a rock talk.  That being said, mediation can be successful where a party is reluctant, but open minded.  The “magic” of mediation is the atmosphere it creates that encourages people to think about their situation in a different light and try to resolve the dispute.

Parties must be willing to participate fully and be vulnerable.  If one party senses that the other side is holding out or holding back, that would hinder the process. Transparency is key.

Every once and a while, a party only seeks mediation for bad faith reasons, such as to garner information to use against the other side.  The mediator will stop the mediation if she senses bad faith intent.

If there is a large power imbalance, mediation may not work.  If one of the parties interprets that there may be a power imbalance, they may opt to litigate rather than mediate.  Human nature would say that people don’t like to feel dominated and will typically avoid being dominated. Power imbalances can be caused by a history of domestic violence.  It can also be caused when there is a difference in status between the parties (a company president, for example, in a room with an employee).  Power imbalances are mitigated when attorneys are involved.  Further, the mediator can take such steps as placing parties in separate rooms during negotiations to mitigate the imbalance.  The role of the mediator in general gives both sides a sense of equality in the process.

If you want to know if mediation is right for you in the Metro Phoenix area call Alona M.  Gottfried at 480-998-1500 or Contact Us.

This article is not intended to be legal advice.  Consult your legal professional before making legal decisions.

What Arizona attorneys want, more than anything else, are happy, satisfied clients.
Happy, satisfied clients make attorneys’ jobs fulfilling.  These types of clients are also more likely to pay their bills, not complain and refer their friends and colleagues to their attorneys.

Attorneys who use mediation in Arizona are more likely to have happy, satisfied clients.  With mediation, there is no losing party.  The clients save money, time and the stress of a trial, and they have the satisfaction of reaching their own agreements.  Mediation also provides the cathartic experience clients often need of being heard.

In private mediation, the attorneys still have the opportunity to guide and protect their clients, as good mediators actively involve the attorneys in the process and rely on the attorney’s wisdom and persuasive skills.  Good mediators go out of their ways to make attorneys look good to their clients.

Maricopa County Superior Courts often offer settlement conferences with a Judge Pro Tempore  in litigation.  However, there are significant detriments to using settlement conferences instead of a private mediator.  First, the attorneys do not get to pick the Judge Pro Tempore.  The Judge Pro Tempore assigned may be untrained in or bad at conflict resolution.  In that case, the conference may be a waste of time and resources.  It may also cause the parties to drift further apart in their settlement postures.  Second, settlement conferences are limited in time – generally to two to three hours.  Cases often need a full day to settle.  Third, settlement conferences are usually only offered at the tail end of cases, right before trial.  Attorneys can often save the time of gearing up for trial by requesting a private mediation as soon as they have their discovery complete, or even earlier.

In family law cases, the Maricopa County Superior Court offers mediation for $200.00.  Private mediation is still a better option.  First, again, the attorneys cannot ensure the quality of the mediators or the timing of the mediation.  Second, attorneys are not allowed to participate in these mediation sessions.  Finally the mediation is limited to custody and access issues.
Busy attorneys get the added benefit from private mediation of getting cases (including those troublesome cases) off their desks.

Simmons & Gottfried, PLLC.
3977 N. 7th Street, Suite 340
Phoenix, AZ 85014

As an Arizona employment and Arizona family law attorney, I have seen the negative impact of litigation on its participants.  Though litigation is often necessary to pursue one’s rights, it has many disadvantages.   In a nutshell, the litigation process is:

a)    Time consuming – It is not unusual for litigation to take more than two years to complete – and significantly longer if either party appeals the trial court’s decision.

b)    Emotionally draining and / or traumatizing — Without timely resolution, and with the added stress of litigation, the original pain or aggravation that brought the parties to Court compounds.  Also, no matter what relationship the parties had prior to litigation, by trial, the rift between the parties is often irreparable.

c)    Costly – Litigation is very expensive.  A party may win their case but lose in terms of the impact on their bank account.

d)    Uncertain – It has been said that every attorney has lost cases they should have won and won cases they should have lost.  Litigation is too uncertain.  To illustrate this point, I sometimes ask my clients whether they thought McDonalds was prepared for a 21 million dollar judgment for not adequately explaining that coffee is hot.

e)    Rigid – Courts are restricted on how they can resolve matters.  In the end, there is often a winner and a loser.  Courts are not concerned with preserving relationships, protecting reputations through confidentiality agreements or even finding a compromise.  There is often a better way that the law cannot address.

Mediation, on the other hand, offers a prompt, cost effective way for parties to resolve disputes, sometimes creatively, while preserving relationships.

Even thought the preceding points are well accepted as true, it is not unusual for one or both parties to a dispute to resist mediation.

For my part, I do my best to nudge parties toward mediation.  While I have no problem successfully describing the many benefits of mediation to my own client, convincing the opposing counsel or party is an entirely different matter.

In the hope my experiences in persuading the wary to try mediation may help you, I recite below a typical conversation with someone resistant to mediation:

Me:     Why don’t we mediate?

Opposing counsel: “My client does not want to pay for mediation.”  (Most litigants do not have the option of free mediation).

Me:    Hmmm.  But your client does want to pay you another $50,000.00 to take this matter to trial in another year and risk losing?

OC:    What can I tell you? My client cannot afford to pay.

Me:     (Heavy sigh – by this time, I am irked) Have you ever heard the phrase “penny wise, pound foolish,” coined by author Robert Burton?

OC:    No.  I don’t read.

Me:     The question is not whether you can afford to mediate, but whether you can afford not to mediate.

OC:    I see your point.  I agree that my client is just shortsighted. (Okay, the opposing counsel, never actually admits this).  Still, the parties are too far apart for mediation to be useful.

Me:  That is exactly why we need a good mediator.  A mediator may help one or both parties determine if they are taking unreasonable position, or even help the parties come up with entirely new resolution ideas.

Even if it seems like a case will never settle, the parties owe it to themselves to give it a try.  I have seen cases resolve in mediation where the parties were further apart than the Arizona Cardinals and a Super Bowl victory.

OC:     Once again, you are right! (I am exercising creative license here).  But, I think that we should wait until we are closer to trial and gathered more evidence.

Me:     There is no reason to wait to try mediation – it is just a waste of time and money to put mediation off.  A mediator does not determine right or wrong and does not need evidence to help parties reach resolution.

In fact, if I had it my way, companies and organizations would instigate mediation programs to resolve problems before lawyers have to get involved.  I represent employees, and most of my clients would not have had to visit me had the employers dealt with the issue promptly and with respect, as they could with mediation.

Most cases do resolve before trial. But, without the aid of a mediator, settlement usually occurs on the proverbial steps of the courthouse, after most of the damage is done.

OC:  Okay, with your undeniably brilliant argument, you have convinced me.  If your client is willing to split the cost, I will encourage my client to agree to mediation!

There will likely come a day where most people will know the benefits of mediation, and parties to lawsuits may have no choice but to participate in mediation.  Until then, spread your knowledge of mediation to the masses – with rare exception, it is worth everyone’s time and effort.

3877 N. 7th Street, Suite 340

Phoenix, AZ  85014