California Supreme Court Makes Confidentiality of Mediation Proceedings Iron Clad

The California Supreme Court, in Simmons v. Ghaderito sanction bad faith behavior. There is no
(July 21, 2008), has hammered in the last nail and hasconfidentiality statute making an exception for reporting
made confidentiality of mediation proceedings iron clad.bad faith conduct through the disclosure of mediation
The court held that there can be NO implied waiver ofcommunications.
mediation confidentiality. An oral settlement agreement4. Section 1115's placement within the Evidence Code
that is not in writing, signed by the parties and wherefurther supports the conclusion that implied waiver
there is no express waiver of mediation confidentiality,does not apply to mediation confidentiality. Unlike the
is not admissible and will not be upheld in court. Even ifprivileges subject to implied waiver that are found in
the parties engage in bad faith behavior during adivision 8, entitled "Privileges," the Legislature placed
mediation that would warrant sanctions, there is nosection 1115 et seq. in division 9, entitled "Evidence
implied waiver of the mediation confidentiality. By layingAffected or Excluded by Extrinsic Policies." This
down clear rules, the Legislature intended, as a matterplacement reflects that the Legislature considered the
of public policy, to reduce litigation over the admissibilityspecific limitations placed on the admissibility of
and disclosure of evidence regarding settlements andevidence by the mediation confidentiality statutes and
communications that occur during mediation.endorsed those limitations to encourage mediation as a
Dr. Ghaderi, in a wrongful death medical malpracticematter of public policy.
lawsuit was at the mediation with her insurance5. Finally, the legislative history of the mediation
adjuster and the defense attorneys. She had given herconfidentiality statutes as a whole reflects a desire
consent to settle, providing the settlement amount wasthat section 1115 et seq. be strictly followed in the
at or below $125,000. Plaintiff's accepted the $125,000.interest of efficiency. By laying down clear rules, the
However, defendant and the claims adjuster, andLegislature intended to reduce litigation over the
defense attorneys refused to sign the settlementadmissibility and disclosure of evidence regarding
agreement when Dr. Ghaderi walked out of thesettlements and communications that occur during
mediation and orally revoked her consent. Plaintiffsmediation. Allowing courts to craft judicial exceptions to
went to the trial court to enforce the "writtenthe statutory rules would run counter to that intent.
agreement" that the mediator had drafted, and whichThe Supreme Court held that both the clear language
was signed by the plaintiffs. The trial court and court ofof the mediation statutes and the prior rulings support
appeal awarded the settlement amount as a judgment.the preclusion of an implied waiver exception. The
The Supreme Court overturned the decisions and heldLegislature chose to promote mediation by ensuring
that the mediation confidentiality statutes madeconfidentiality rather than adopt a scheme to ensure
inadmissible all evidence of an oral contract betweengood behavior in the mediation and litigation process.
plaintiffs and defendant during mediation. Specifically, noTips to Secure an Enforceable settlement agreement
form of recordation of the oral agreement existedIf you are a party or an advocate to a mediation
which was signed by all parties.proceeding, and orally agree to a settlement, REDUCE
The California Supreme court made the followingTHE SETTLEMENT TO WRITING, SIGNED BY ALL
points:THE PARTIES. Some mediators do not take this
1. The clear language of the statutory scheme andrequirement seriously and are very sloppy with having
other indications of legislative intent reflect thatthe parties reduce it to writing.
disallowing an implied waiver would not produce absurdReduce the settlement to writing AT the mediation. IF
consequences, but was rather an intendedNOT, ONE PARTY WILL HAVE BUYER'S
consequence.REMORSE AND will later REVOKE THE oral
2. Evidence Code section 1119 sweeps broadly andCONSENT TO SETTLE.
renders all communications and writings made duringThe parties should draft the settlement agreement, not
mediation inadmissible except as otherwise specified inthe mediator.
the statutes. Evidence Code Section 1122 plainly statesMake sure that there is a provision in the agreement
that mediation communications or writings may bethat the settlement is enforceable pursuant to
admitted only on agreement of all participants. SuchCalifornia Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6, which
agreement must be express, not implied. Thestates that the Superior Court will retain jurisdiction to
Legislature intended Evidence code section 1122 toenforce the terms of the settlement. Following these
give litigants control over whether a mediationfew simple steps will insure that the dispute has settled
communication will be used in subsequent litigation.and is enforceable if one party does not keep the
3. Code of Civil Procedure section 128.5 allows a courtterms of the agreement.