LD 1295
pg. 17
Page 16 of 67 An Act To Enact the Uniform Mediation Act Page 18 of 67
Download Bill Text
LR 464
Item 1

 
latitude to restrict the application of the privilege in
situations where such an application of the privilege would
constitute an abuse. For example, an individual trying to hide
information from a court might later attempt to characterize a
call to an acquaintance about a dispute as an inquiry to the
acquaintance about the possibility of mediating the dispute.
This definition would permit the court to disallow a
communication privilege, and admit testimony from that
acquaintance by finding that the communication was not "made for
the purposes of initiating considering, initiating, continuing,
or reconvening a mediation or retaining a mediator."

 
Responding in part to public concerns about the complexity of
earlier drafts, the Drafting Committees also elected to leave
the question of when a mediation ends to the sound judgment of
the courts to determine according to the facts and
circumstances presented by individual cases. See Bidwell v.
Bidwell, 173 Or. App. 288 (2001) (ruling that letters between
attorneys for the parties that were sent after referral to
mediation and related to settlement were mediation
communications and therefore privileged under the Oregon
statute). In weighing language about when a mediation ends,
the Drafting Committees considered other more specific
approaches for answering these questions. One approach in
particular would have terminated the mediation after a
specified period of time if the parties failed to reach an
agreement, such as the 10-day period specified in Cal. Evid.
Code Section 1125 (West 1997) (general). However, the Drafting
Committees rejected that approach because it felt that such a
requirement could be easily circumvented by a routine practice
of extending mediation in a form mediation agreement. Indeed,
such an extension in a form agreement could result in the
coverage of communications unrelated to the dispute for years
to come, without furthering the purposes of the privilege.

 
Finally, this definition would also include mediation "briefs"
and other reports that are prepared by the parties for the
mediator. Whether the document is prepared for the mediation
is a crucial issue. For example, a tax return brought to a
divorce mediation would not be a "mediation communication"
because it was not a "statement made as part of the
mediation," even though it may have been used extensively in
the mediation. However, a note written on the tax return to
clarify a point for other participants would be a mediation
communication. Similarly, a memorandum specifically prepared
for the mediation by the party or the party's representative
explaining the rationale behind certain positions taken on the
tax return would be a "mediation communication." Documents
prepared for the mediation by expert witnesses attending the
mediation would also be covered by
this definition. See Section 4(b)(3).


Page 16 of 67 Top of Page Page 18 of 67