Conference Agenda
Download a printer-friendly agenda
CLE approval is pending for 6.0.
| 8 – 9 a.m. | Registration |
| 9 – 9:15 a.m. | Welcome Archie Griffin Ballroom, 2nd Floor Richard Altman, Host Hon. Maureen O’Connor (recorded) Jeffrey Hagler |
| 9:15 – 10 a.m. |
Plenary Session: Unconventional Responses to Unique Catastrophes: Tailoring ADR to Meet the Challenges Following traumatic national tragedies like the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, and the Boston Marathon bombings, government officials often create special compensation programs for victims. Kenneth Feinberg has been called upon time and again to design, implement, and administer these programs as an alternative to conventional litigation. His talk will focus on the advantages and disadvantages of administering these unique ADR programs. Kenneth R. Feinberg, Esq. Plenary Session II: Frontiers of Dispute Resolution The experts on the luncheon panel have been recognized for their innovations in the digital world, family courts, complex litigation, polarized-community situations, and for providing access to those operating without counsel while assuring a quality experience. They will discuss opportunities and challenges for dispute resolution in the courts and beyond. Learning Objectives:
Moderator: Hon. Nancy H. Rogers Participants: Paul Embley, CIO and Technology Division Director Serpil Ergun, Esq., Chief Magistrate, Administrator for Judicial Operations Kenneth Feinberg, Esq. Michael Lewis, Esq., JAMS Mediator and Arbitrator Hon. Daniel A. Polster, Judge Robby Southers, JD, Manager Kyle Strickland, JD, Senior Legal Analyst Nancy Welsh, Professor of Law and Director of the Dispute Resolution Program Kenneth R. Feinberg, Esq. Introduction of Plenary Speaker: |
| 10 – 10:15 a.m. | Break |
| 10:15 - 11:15 a.m. | Breakout Session A (Choose one. Click title for course description.)
A1: Mediator Do's and Don'ts Over the past four decades, Kenneth Feinberg has been involved in a series of complex mediations testing the skills of mediation participants and mediators. This session will focus on some of the critical steps taken by mediators to promote the likelihood of success and on mediation mistakes inhibiting the effort to get to “yes.” Kenneth R. Feinberg, Esq. A2: Online Dispute Resolution in the Courts: Today's Courts, Today's Technology Learn about online dispute resolution (ODR) projects being implemented across the U.S. and around the world, their successes and challenges, the numbers and metrics behind the successes, and how ODR significantly improves access to justice. In this session, faculty will recognize commonalities in local and statewide jurisdictions that can be useful for crafting an ODR strategy. Participants will learn the important role of standards in ensuring an ODR system can work with eFiling, ePayment, CMS, and other systems. Learning Obectives:
Paul Embley,CIO and Technology Division Director A3: The Role of US Courts in International Commercial Arbitration This session will introduce attendees to the law and practice of international commercial arbitration as an alternative to litigation, and to private and binding methods of resolving international commercial disputes. Attendees will learn the basics of international commercial arbitration from entering into an arbitration agreement to running an arbitration, and how to recognize and enforce foreign-arbitral awards. Special attention will be paid to the role of state and federal courts in international commercial arbitration, including enforcement of the arbitration agreement, issuance of interim measures, appointment of arbitrators, providing assistance in taking evidence, and setting aside, recognizing, and enforcing foreign arbitral awards. Learning Objectives:
Benjamin G. Davis, Professor of Law Vera Korzun, LL.M., S.J.D., Assistant Professor of Law A4: Screening for Safety and Success Pre-mediation screening for safety, threats, intimidation, and a party’s capacity to mediate is important in all practice areas. Screening can identify cases that require specific mediation protocols and other safeguards, as well as cases in which mediation is not appropriate. In family cases, screeners also explore whether the parties have a history of violence, coercive control, or other types of domestic abuse that could affect their ability to participate in a mediation session. In this interactive session, participants will discuss best practices for screening, effective screening tools and techniques, skills screeners need to recognize when parties require a specialized-mediation process, and how to incorporate screening into their practices and courts. Learning Objectives:
Marya Cody Kolman, Director of Mediation Services Christy Cumberlander Walker, Senior Family Services Specialist A5: How A History of Trauma Impacts Dispute Resolution and What Can be Done to Generate Positive Case Outcomes An estimated 90 percent of court users have experienced some form of trauma that impacts their behavior and decision making, and may be a barrier to case resolution. Psychology and cognitive-behavioral therapy offer techniques designed to help individuals with histories of stress and trauma focus on solutions. These approaches have generated successes in business, social policy, education, criminal justice, child welfare, mediation, and domestic violence treatment. This session will provide an overview of trauma and approaches judges, attorneys, mediators, and court staff can use to help individuals with trauma and stress generate positive outcomes. Learning Objectives:
Shawnieka E. Pope, MSW, LSW, Guardianship Director Alex Sanchez, Esq., Manager and Mediator Adam Wills, MSW, LISW-S, Employee Assistance Program Counselor A6: School Attendance: Using Mediation to Strengthen School-Family Relationships With the enactment of House Bill 410, Ohio changed how the juvenile courts and the school districts handle truancy issues. School districts now are required to engage with families and to look for supports to improve attendance, rather than seek to file charges against juveniles who are not in school. This session will contain a brief overview of the requirements of HB 410, examine the myths and reality of attendance, and examine a court/school partnership addressing attendance issues through mediation. Learning Obectives:
Dr. Adonis Bolden, Assistant Principal April Nelson, JD, Staff Mediator A7: Collaborative Law in the Courts: An Oxymoron or an Innovative Idea? Presenters bring extensive training and experience in financial, psychological, emotional, and legal aspects of divorce, and will address how collaborative law offers solutions for family courts. Presenters will describe practices and programs to facilitate mutual support between the family courts and collaborative law in providing options for parties facing termination of marriage and/or parenting issues. Learning Objectives:
Amy Armstrong, Clinician Hon. James W. Brown, Judge Elaine S. Buck,Esq., Partner Susan Moussi, Certified Public Accountant (CPA) xA8: Beyond Just the Dispute at Hand - Using Transformative Mediation Techniques to Better Understand and Resolve Conflict When conflict arises at work or in domestic situations, it often has roots that extend far beyond the issue presented in mediation. In these circumstances, successfully resolving the dispute will depend on getting to the heart of the conflict to help the parties understand how to move forward. Transformative mediation techniques allow for a deeper dive into the origins of the conflict, which can help the parties resolve both the present dispute and the broader issues surrounding it. Additionally, these techniques can help parties learn how to prevent future conflicts. Learning Objectives:
Brandon Lester, Associate General Counsel A9: Strategies for Addressing the Impact of Implicit Bias at the Interpersonal and Institutional Level The Kirwan Institute at The Ohio State University is a national leader in research on how implicit biases can unconsciously shape individuals’ cognition, attitudes, and behaviors. In this interactive session, participants will learn how our minds operate from a social-cognitive perspective and highlight how law, policy, and practice can perpetuate inequality. We will explore how implicit bias operates in the context of our work with each other, within the justice system, and how it influences decision-making and behavior. Participants will leave with strategies for guarding against the influence of implicit bias on the individual, organizational, and institutional levels. Learning Objectives:
Kip Holley, Research Associate Kyle Strickland, JD, Senior Legal Analyst Ronnell Tomlinson, Director of Housing Enforcement and Director of Mediation/ADR Services |
|
|
| 11:15 – 11:30 a.m. | Break |
| 11:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. | Breakout Session B (Choose one. Click title for course description.)
B1: Judicial Involvement in Dispute Resolution: Customizing Options for Challenging Cases There is no one-size-fits-all approach to resolving complex disputes. Judge Polster will explore when and how a trial judge should serve as a mediator in his/ her cases. Judge Polster also will discuss creative ways a judge and a private mediator can collaborate to resolve complex multi-party disputes. Hon. Daniel A. Polster, Judge B2: Online Dispute Resolution and Lessons Learned This national panel will discuss developments in online dispute resolution (ODR), share examples of the types of cases suited for ODR, and highlight the growing number of courts that have come to rely on ODR throughout the country. An experienced judge and court administrators will share what they have learned along the way. Learning Objectives:
Paul Embley, CIO and Technology Division Director Danielle Hirsch, Principal Court Management Consultant Hon. Brendan McCullagh, Judge B3: Want Fewer Permanent Custody Trials? Child-Protection Mediation (CPM) for Family Engagement and Case Resolution Presenters will share how mediation has helped in various stages of child-welfare cases, from preadjudication through permanent custody. Participants will learn what is involved in starting or expanding a CPM program, as well as new resources and trends. Additionally, participants will receive a self-assessment to assess if CPM would be a good fit for their court. Learning Objectives:
Hon. Denise McColley, Judge Kate Munger, Esq., Policy Counsel, Case Management Section Heather Fournier, Esq., Chief Deputy Clerk Shelby Cully, Esq., Chief Counsel B4: Exploring Options to Resolve Disagreements within Juvenile Courts, Education, and Special Education This two-part workshop includes an overview of services and resources available to courts, schools, and the community to resolve disagreements constructively. Part I: It is not uncommon for both parents and districts to feel confused and unsure of what process to use when there is a dispute between the parent and the district regarding special education services. The Office for Exceptional Children (OEC) will explain available options and factors to be considered when choosing an option. Complaint resolution can be facilitated by awareness about available resources. Families and districts that participate more in mediation and facilitation make fewer complaints and due-process filings. Part II: Ohio court personnel and educators can create positive change through their leadership in their communities. Angry parties? Hot topics? Passionate colleagues or community partners? Gain an overview of what to do when emotions run high – compromise isn’t the only option. Participants will explore resources on how to de-escalate difficult situations and move from gridlock to effective solutions with challenging issues. This session will utilize the materials and resources developed specifically for the state of Minnesota’s Bureau of Mediation Services, which may be duplicated and utilized with attribution. Monica Drvota, Interim Associate Director, Office for Exceptional Children Heidi Kleinman, Interim Coordinator for Dispute Resolution Coordinator, Dispute Resolution Section, Office for Exceptional Children Jennifer Batton, former Director of Education Programs B5: Mediation in Ohio Appellate Courts: Keeping it Civil, Making it Successful Learn the ins and outs of the appellate mediation process in Ohio and best practices that successful appellate mediation attorneys use to maximize the effectiveness of the process, including appearing on a limited-scope basis solely for mediation. This presentation will cover unique features of appellate mediation and provide a skill-building platform practitioners can use in any ADR process. The panel will address situations where creating and maintaining civility can be challenging in appellate mediation and provide examples of how skilled practitioners can create calm when tensions are high. Learning Objectives:
Carrie Connelly, Esq., Mediation Attorney and Assistant Court Administrator Rick Dove, Esq., Director, Board of Professional Conduct Sharon Maerten-Moore, Court Administrator and Magistrate B6: Mediation with Public Officials: What Public Officials Can Tell Mediators, and Tips for Public Officials Mediators: Public officials are not telling you everything you need to know to resolve cases. Learn what questions to ask from a mediator and advocate who has represented 88 counties, 110 school districts, dozens of other political subdivisions, and every constitutional officer of the state. Public officials: You should make requests to help you govern without fear of litigation. Learn how to handle the optics of settling a case against yourself, personally and professionally. Learning Objectives:
Mark Landes Managing Partner B7: One Size Does Not Fit All: Using Dispute Systems Design to Address Power Imbalances in Mediation This interactive panel will look at power imbalances in mediation and explore the use of dispute systems design (DSD) principles to deal with them. Often mediators of small claims, domestic, and employment cases serve parties with significantly different levels of power. The session will explore types of power, their impact in a negotiation, the use of DSD principles to create effective processes, and tools to address imbalances. The panelists also will introduce the use of subject matter experts to address imbalances, focusing on whether and when to include them. The presenters will work with session participants to dissect two complex scenarios, role-play scenarios, and discuss how participants can implement lessons learned in their individual mediation practices. Learning Objectives:
Deirdre McCarthy Gallagher, President and Founder Jane Juliano, Chief, Alternative Dispute Resolution Unit B8: Tailored Mediator's Proposal in Commercial Cases This session will include an interactive presentation on mediation of commercial disputes and review techniques for rapport-building with business decision-makers. The presenter will address crafting of a detailed “term sheet” to resolve a failed business deal, either with the parties’ collaboration or, if facing an impasse, a mediator’s proposal. This session will examine the alternatives of (1) re-negotiating the deal: restoring adversarial business partners’ opportunity to re-engage in ongoing joint commercial endeavors; or (2) terminating the failed deal with agreed provisions for mutual exit plans and next steps. Learning Objectives:
Frank Ray, Mediator of Complex Civil Cases B9: A Tool to Help Courts: Special Masters The American Bar Association House of Delegates recently adopted a widely supported resolution encouraging courts to make more effective use of special masters. This session will explore why organizations are advocating for courts to consider using special masters as a regular part of complex civil litigation. This session also will review the many roles that special masters can play, how the process compares to mediation and arbitration, what ethical considerations apply, and whether and how courts should oversee the performance of special masters. Learn about opportunities and challenges presented by this dispute resolution process for neutrals, judges, and litigants. Learning Objectives:
Merril Hirsh, HirshADR PLLC, and Merril Hirsh PLLC, Washington, DC, Co-Chair, American Bar Association Judicial Division Lawyers Conference Committee on Special Masters Nancy A. Welsh, Professor of Law and Director of the Dispute Resolution Program |
|
|
| 12:30 – 1 p.m. | Lunch Archie Griffin Ballroom, 2nd Floor |
| 1:15 – 2:15 p.m. | Plenary Session II: Frontiers for Dispute Resolution Archie Griffin Ballroom, 2nd Floor Moderator: Hon. Nancy H. Rogers Participants: Paul Embley, CIO and Technology Division Director Serpil Ergun, Esq., Chief Magistrate, Administrator for Judicial Operations Kenneth Feinberg, Esq. Michael Lewis, Esq., JAMS Mediator and Arbitrator Hon. Daniel A. Polster, Judge Robby Southers, JD, Manager Kyle Strickland, JD, Senior Legal Analyst Nancy Welsh, Professor of Law and Director of the Dispute Resolution Program |
| 2:15 – 2:30 p.m. | Break |
| 2:30 – 3:30 p.m. | Breakout Session C (Choose one. Click title for course description.)
C1: Why Caucus? Capitalizing on its Strengths, Minimizing Its Drawbacks Parties and their representatives often caucus (meet in separate sessions) with a mediator, either at their request or that of the mediator. How can an advocateas- negotiator constructively use the mediator in a caucus setting to advance a client’s goals? What can a mediator achieve in caucus that cannot otherwise be secured in joint sessions? This interactive workshop examines effective advocate strategies for working with a mediator to communicate negotiating flexibility or firmness, and mediator tactics and ethical responsibilities when piercing negotiating gamesmanship and exploring or transmitting settlement options. Learning Objectives:
Josh Stulberg, Emeritus Michael E. Moritz Chair, Alternative Dispute Resolution C2: Online Dispute Resolution and Access to Justice in Rural Communities: How Portals Can Help Overcome Barriers of Vocation, Language, Limited Mobility, and More Rural communities, individuals with disabilities, and English-language learners have unique barriers to accessing justice. Participants who attend this session will learn how litigant portals and online dispute resolution are two unique, but related innovations that states are implementing to help address disparities in accessing justice. Faculty also will discuss how courts can reduce initial implementation costs by modifying legal-help content developed for other state portals. Learning Objectives:
Paul Embley, CIO and Technology Division Director C3: How To's of Decision Tree Analysis for Lawyers, Mediators, and Their Clients Decision-tree analysis in general, and risk trees in particular, can be extremely useful tools in a mediator’s toolbox. They enable lawyers and mediators to map, then discuss the twists, turns, and critical points in the parties’ litigation alternatives. This facilitates parties’ understanding of legal uncertainties, arrays of possible positive and negative outcomes, tangible and intangible costs, and consequences. Decision trees can be used within client counseling and the mediation process to move parties’ psychological anchors, reduce loss perceptions, and improve communication around numbers and case assessments. Participants will learn the basics of decision-tree analysis, along with its underlying logic and meaning, and will work through the structure of decision trees from simple to reasonably complex cases. Learning Objectives:
Marjorie Corman Aaron, Professor of Practice and Director of the Center for Practice C4: Addiction Alternatives: Alternative Dispute Resolution Principles Applied to the Opioid Crisis In August 2019, The Ohio State University's College of Public Health and the University of North Carolina's School of Public Health received a National Institute of Health grant to address problems related to the opioid crisis in southern Ohio. The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law's Divided Community Project (DCP) provided dispute-systems design support for project implementation, and Moritz students enrolled in a dispute systems design course provided support for the project during the Fall of 2019. Panelists will identify roots of the opioid crisis, discuss dispute systems design and mediation research related to the crisis, propose next steps to support those intertwined in the crisis, and leverage participants ideas and resources. Michael Lewis, Esq., JAMS Mediator and Arbitrator William Miller, Senior Associate Dean of Research and Professor Jane Tsai, Research Fellow, Divided Community Project C5: Combining Elder Maltreatment Through Laws, Legal Interventions, and Eldercaring Coordination Elder maltreatment is an ever-growing, devastating societal problem that hurts older victims and their loved ones and negatively impacts the community. This workshop will increase awareness of signs and symptoms of elder maltreatment and discuss various legal remedies to protect older adults. This session will review Ohio Adult Protective Services laws, recent legislative revisions, and useful involuntary legal interventions. Eldercaring coordination will be highlighted as a court-ordered strategy to increase safety and empower the voice of older adults in families with high-conflict dynamics. The instructors will share case scenarios, interventions, and strategies for combating elder maltreatment. Learning Objectives:
Sue Bronson, LCSW, Co-Chair Linda Fieldstone, M.Ed., Co-Chair Sylvia Pla-Raith, MA, LSW, Director, Elder Justice Unit April Wehrle, BS, Senior Elder Services Coordinator, Elder Justice Unit C6: Lessons in Restorative Justice in Cases Involving Youth: Nebraska's Experience and Beyond This session will explore ways restorative justice practices can be applied to cases involving youth at various entry points in the juvenile justice system. Over the last three years, Nebraska piloted and expanded a restorative justice program that allows for varied implementation across the state. The program is based on evidence-based research, and this presentation will include the results of internal and external program evaluations. Learn how these practices may be implemented in other jurisdictions and lessons drawn from Nebraska's experience. Learning Objectives:
Kristen M. Blankley, Professor of Law Alisha C. Jimenez, Analyst, Restorative Justice Program, Office of Dispute Resolution C7: Interactive Training Techniques: Three Expert Approaches Three experienced mediation trainers offer a demonstration of interactive techniques to rejuvenate your trainings. Zena Zumeta will discuss how to get experienced mediators to role play in advanced mediation training. Susan Butterwick will present on fishbowl techniques for teaching pre-mediation interviews in elder mediations. Barbara Johannessen will present on the basics of teaching mediation, from the vantage point of the parties. Each trainer will demonstrate their techniques using participants from the audience. Come get involved and inspired, and enjoy the discussion following each demonstration. Learning Objectives:
Susan J. Butterwick, Esq., Juvenile Court Referee Barbara A. Johannessen, President Zena Zumeta, President C8: Overcoming Impasse by Effectively Using the Mediator's Proposal and Bracketing Oftentimes during a mediation parties become discouraged because they differ so much in opinion and reaching a compromise feels impossible. Using video vignettes, three experienced mediators will share their experiences using brackets and a mediator’s proposal to assist parties in reaching a reasonable settlement range. These tools help narrow the gap between parties and encourage continued negotiation. Learning Objectives:
Peggy Foley Jones, Esq., Mediator and Arbitrator Doug Godshall, Esq., Mediator and Arbitrator Matt Mennes, Civil Mediator C9: The New Singapore Convention on Mediation: What Does It Mean for Mediation in the US? A new United Nations treaty providing for the enforcement of mediated agreements resulting from international commercial mediations was opened for signature in August 2019. By the end of the month, 46 nations, including the U.S., had signed it. The treaty will go into effect after three nations ratify it. One hope for the treaty is that it will spur acceptance of mediation, comparable to the general acceptance of arbitration for international commercial disputes. This presentation will provide background on the negotiation of the convention, describe its provisions for enforcement, and discuss possible implications for mediation in the U.S., including possible tensions with mediator practices, and a possible path to legislation on enforcement of mediated agreements (a subject not included in the Uniform Mediation Act). Learning Objectives:
Ellen E. Deason, Joanne Wharton Murphy/Classes of 1965 and 1973 Professor in Law |
|
|
| 3:30 – 3:45 p.m. | Break |
| 3:45 – 4:45 p.m. | Breakout Session D (Choose one. Click title for course description.)
D1: Attorney Advocacy in Mediation The manner in which an attorney advocates effectively in mediation differs markedly from an advocate in litigation. Mediation is assisted negotiation: when negotiation reaches an impasse, a mediator assists the parties in reaching an agreement. The attorney should partner with the mediator to identify the parties’ interests, explore, and create options to satisfy those interests, find standards for evaluating options, and open purposive communication to build a working relationship between the parties and the mediator to reach an acceptable outcome. Learning Objectives:
Kwame Christian, Esq., M.A., Director James K. L. Lawrence, Partner (Ret.) D2: AI and Dispute Resolution: How Artificial Intelligence Fits Into Dispute Resolution Artificial Intelligence (AI) is the new buzz word. Will AI replace judges, mediators, and even participants? Is there a place for AI in the courts, and if so, what role should it play? Should AI be feared or embraced? Learn about some of the AI solutions that hold promise, as well as some of the successes, challenges, and ethical considerations. Learning Objectives:
Paul Embley, CIO and Technology Division Director D3: Neutral Evaluation Nuts and Bolts: Where the Process Fits in Family Court Dispute Resolution Neutral evaluation, a dispute resolution process, has its roots in 1980s civil litigation from California. It is a process in which parties express their position and evaluators determine potential success in court. Neutral evaluation is more formal than mediation and includes an opportunity to mediate a settlement. In some courts, evaluators are magistrates with social workers or counselors. Other courts use contract attorneys with social workers or counselors. The presenters will discuss creating a neutral evaluation program and various models and methods to utilize neutral evaluation in a court process. Learning Objectives:
Rosalind C. Florez, Magistrate, Director D4: Empowering the Community and Improving Court Efficiency: How Courts Provide Legal Information and Conflict Education on a Proactive and Preventative Basis The Franklin County Municipal Court’s Dispute Resolution Department and Self-Help Resource Center are partnering in community engagement projects to proactively and preventatively provide legal information and conflict mediation education to the public. This presentation will discuss the collaboration between these two court departments in providing resources to the community with the goal of providing positive outcomes for the community and the court. Learning Objectives:
Veronica Cravener, Small Claims and Dispute Resolution Supervisor Robby Southers, JD, Manager D5: Dispute Resolution for Workplace Conflict: When We Can't All Just Get Along This session will provide employers and managers with a thoughtful approach to addressing workplace conflict. In addition to identifying the tangible and intangible costs of unresolved workplace conflict, participants will consider instances in which some workplace conflict can be beneficial and should even be encouraged. Attendees also will learn best practices for preventing avoidable and disruptive workplace conflict, and for resolving existing conflict in an effective manner that improves the interpersonal dynamic of the work environment and focuses employees on the mission of the employer. Learning Objectives:
Kimberly Vanover Riley, Partner D6: Crunch Time: How to Prepare for and Participate in Mediation When Disputes are at Their Most Difficult Resolving disputes is difficult when the parties suffer from litigation fatigue, feel the financial impact of their legal bills, become frustrated they aren’t receiving their brand of justice, or their counsel or mediator aren’t prepared to address the issues. During this session the panel will lead a discussion regarding the different techniques and styles mediators use, how to prepare for and participate in trial court and appellate mediation, and what advocate attorneys should expect and ask for from a mediator to ensure the parties maximize the potential of the mediation process. Learning Objectives:
John Minter, Mediation Attorney Kathryn Wollenburg, Mediator Anne Marie Sferra, Partner Sasha A. M. Blaine, Esq., Mediator D7: Consideration of the Model Standards of Conduct and Rule 16 in Guiding Our Practice This presentation is intended for all who mediate, refer to mediation, or employ mediators. A panel of four mediation practitioners will review the Model Standards of Conduct, Sup. Rule 16, and touch on local rules. The panel will share cases and their experience of how the Model Standards served as guideposts in practice. The interactive nature of the presentation will encourage participants to ask questions, discuss the cases presented, and share their own cases. Learning Objectives:
Teresa P. Cusma, M.Ed., Advanced Mediation Practitioner Tammy Martin Kosier, J.D., Mediator and Program Coordinator Martha L. Riewaldt, JD, Lawyer, Mediator, and Trainer James Stergios Petas, M.Ed., Senior Mediator and Director of Mediation Services D8: The Future of Ohio's Dispute Resolution Landscape - Advancing Chief Justice Moyer's Legacy The late Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer led many changes in Ohio’s judicial system, including the implementation of mediation programs in Ohio courts, the development of school-based dispute resolution programming, and the creation of the Uniform Mediation Act. This session will consider how to advance Chief Justice Moyer’s groundwork in dispute resolution 10 years after his passing. Learning Objectives:
Bill Froehlich, Deputy Director, Divided Community Project, Langdon Fellow in Dispute Resolution Wendy S. Hawbaker, Program Coordinator Marya Cody Kolman, Director of Mediation Services Eileen Pruett, (Ret.) Mediator, Mediation Trainer, and Program Design Consultant Essay: ADR as an Alternative to Our Culture of Confrontation D9: Effective Use of Parenting Coordination: From Decision-Making to Building an Effective Co-parenting Team Parenting Coordination (PC) is a dispute resolution and case management role that emerged 25 years ago to assist high-conflict co-parents. The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts revised the Guidelines for Parenting Coordination, providing an update for the family-justice community on developments in the parenting-coordinator role. This session will focus on how family-law professionals can support the development and effective use of PC in their jurisdiction, and the pros and cons of current models of practice. The essential components of appointment orders, PC procedures, and court review will be discussed, as well as guidance about which case types are appropriate for referral. Richard Altman, Magistrate, Chairperson, Commission on Dispute Resolution Debra Carter, Ph.D, Chair, Parenting Coordination Guidelines, Revision Task Force, Clinical and Forensic Psychologist |
|
|
| 4:45 p.m. | Adjourn |
PDF files may be viewed, printed, and searched using the free Acrobat® Reader Acrobat Reader is a trademark of Adobe Systems Incorporated.