Mediation:


An Efficient & Cost Effective Approach F


by AMY J. AMUNDSEN, Attorney & Rule 31 Mediator, & Attorneys ANNE JOHNSON-MEAD & RACHEL LAMBERT


amily lawyers have been using Skype as a means to con- nect a parent and child or a grandparent and child. In a recent case, when a father claimed he was not getting


parenting time, the Court of Appeals found that father’s conver- sations with the child via Skype two or three times a week con- stituted parenting time.1


Lawyers have also used Skype to com-


municate with their clients when the lawyers are out of town or their clients reside in other states or countries. What is Skype? It is a proprietary name for a peer-to-peer voice over internet protocol network.2


Both parties must down-


load the software and then a person can make a telephone call from their computer to another person who is on their comput- er. Te two parties can see each other when they talk as long as they have a web camera placed on their computer or a computer with a built-in camera. Today in our fast moving highly technical world, mediators


are using Skype as a vehicle to engage in negotiations even when a party is out of the city. Te party “Skypes” the mediator while the party’s counsel and the mediator are in the room with the computer, camera and screen. Te party becomes “live” at me- diation and can participate in ‘real time’ in negotiations. As a result, parties who live out of town do not need to spend money on travel expenses. Earlier this year, two “tech-savvy” attorneys needed to have


a case mediated, but a party was unable to attend the mediation as that person was in another state on business. Te mediation was scheduled around a time when that party would be available. Here is what counsel thought about the Skype mediation session: As the attorney for the party who was physically present


at the mediation, I was appreciative of the ability to schedule and attend mediation immediately, without the constraints of physical availability that sometimes present a challenge to scheduling a mediation session. Tere was some initial concern that the “Skyping” party would actually participate, and be able to ignore the distractions of work, but my concern was dispelled as the mediation progressed. With access to facsimile, a scan- ner and email, sharing of documentation between the Skyp- ing party and my client was without interruption or difficulty. Te Skype connection was clear, and due to the reliability of


the technical components at the mediator’s office, specifically a reliable internet connection, and modern video and sound components, it was essentially as if the person who was present via Skype was actually present at the mediation. As the attorney for the party who was available via Skype, I


was grateful for the consideration given to my client and his re- quirement to travel with work. As anyone who has participated in the divorce process knows, whether as an attorney or a party, divorce can be a costly process and a party’s ability to continue to work and not lose income is essential. My client was able to continue his work, and resolve the divorce litigation without losing income or causing problems with his employer. My cli- ent had the comfort of knowing the mediator was concerned for him personally by offering the Skype option as an alternative to a significant loss of income and employer dissatisfaction; and, therefore, allowed a built-in trust and respect for the mediator from my client from the onset of mediation. My “Skyping” client was able to observe and participate


in the mediation as if physically present. He was able to see all documents discussed by simply holding them in front of the webcam, and was able to sign all agreements by scan/email. Without Skype, mediation would not have happened, the case would not have been resolved, and both parties would have ended up in a physically time consuming, financially devastat- ing, emotionally ravaging trial, which would result in the court making decisions for two people who would have lost the ability to control their respective fates. Skype has already served as a means for families to stay


in contact in our extremely transient society, but now Skype offers endless opportunities to mediate and resolve cases with parties who normally would not be in the same jurisdiction, or allows out-of-jurisdiction witnesses to testify as if they were “present” without enormous expense to litigants to make the witness physically present. t


FOOTNOTES 1 Gonzalez-Bonilla v. Mendez, Tenn. Ct. App. E.S. June 28, 2011.


2 “Best Practices for Controlling Skype Within the Enterprise.” Blue Coat. n. page Web. 16 Dec. 2011. www.bluecoat.com/doc/644


9


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28