ILNews

IBA: Mediation Day

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indianapolis Bar Association’s ADR Section and the Bar’s Standing Committee on Pro Bono jointly hosted their first annual Mediation Day on August 3, 2010 at Baker & Daniels downtown Indianapolis office.  The purpose of the Mediation Day was to provide a service to the Marion Circuit Court and community by volunteering time to mediate several screened cases for litigants who qualify for modest means mediation. 

“We truly believe that this joint collaboration between the ADR Section and Pro Bono Committee is a win-win for all involved. It allows the litigants to resolve difficult and emotional issues surrounding their children effectively and economically in a manner in which they can problem solve in a safe environment and control the outcome of their case,” said Jill Goldenberg-Schuman, ADR Section Chair and partner at Cohen Garelick & Glazier.

Attorney volunteer mediators waived their normal $100.00 per hour fee for modest means mediations.  The litigants paid his or her share proportionate share of the modest mean rate based on a sliding scale and the dollars earned were donated to the Indianapolis Bar Foundation. Commissioner Sheryl Lynch in Paternity Court screened non domestic violence cases for inclusion in the project.

“It is a win for the Paternity Court as we can help alleviate the heavy demand in their court due to its high volume case load and at least try to settle some difficult cases. It is a win for the law firms and its staff who house the program as they can provide a great service simply by donating space and time and their staff have the ability to participate/volunteer in something they might not otherwise have had the opportunity, “ Goldenberg-Schuman added. “Finally, the mediators win because not only do we have a chance to help out the litigants and give back to our community and court systems, but it allows the mediators an additional chance to hone their skills.”

To speed the process a pro tem judge was on site to approve mediated agreements in the ten cases set for mediation that day. Staff members from Baker & Daniels assisted with copying and clerical support.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Other than a complete lack of any verifiable and valid historical citations to back your wild context-free accusations, you also forget to allege "ate Native American children, ate slave children, ate their own children, and often did it all while using salad forks rather than dinner forks." (gasp)

  2. "So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)" Well, you know, we're just following in the footsteps of our founders who raped women, raped slaves, raped children, maimed immigrants, sold children, stole property, broke promises, broke apart families, killed natives... You know, good God fearing down home Christian folk! :/

  3. Who gives a rats behind about all the fluffy ranking nonsense. What students having to pay off debt need to know is that all schools aren't created equal and students from many schools don't have a snowball's chance of getting a decent paying job straight out of law school. Their lowly ranked lawschool won't tell them that though. When schools start honestly (accurately) reporting *those numbers, things will get interesting real quick, and the looks on student's faces will be priceless!

  4. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  5. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

ADVERTISEMENT