Pennsylvania Code
Pennsylvania Code & Bulletin
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

• No statutes or acts will be found at this website.

The Pennsylvania Bulletin website includes the following: Rulemakings by State agencies; Proposed Rulemakings by State agencies; State agency notices; the Governor’s Proclamations and Executive Orders; Actions by the General Assembly; and Statewide and local court rules.

PA Bulletin, Doc. No. 15-1963

THE COURTS

WASHINGTON COUNTY

Local Civil Rule L-810—Washington County Civil Litigation Mediation Program; No. 2015-1

[45 Pa.B. 6496]
[Saturday, November 7, 2015]

Order

 And Now, this 19th day of October, 2015; It Is Hereby Ordered that the previously-stated Washington County Local Civil Rule is amended as follows.

 This rule will become effective thirty days after publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.

By the Court

KATHERINE B. EMERY, 
President Judge

L-810. Washington County Civil Litigation Mediation Program.

 a. Cases listed for trial shall be submitted to the Washington County Civil Litigation Mediation Program. This rule shall not apply to asbestos cases, cases ordered to private mediation under this rule, or medical malpractice cases.

 b. The mediators shall be practicing attorneys that are members of the Washington County Bar Association, with an emphasis in their practice on civil litigation. A list of mediators shall be maintained by the District Court Administrator, and selected by the Court in consultation with the Washington County Bar Association.

 c. The District Court Administrator shall select the cases for mediation from the combined civil trial lists, with preference given for the oldest cases by date of filing. The Court may also at its discretion refer a case to mediation once it is placed on the trial list. The selection of a case for mediation shall not delay any scheduled trial of the matter.

 d. Upon appointment, the mediator shall schedule the mediation within sixty (60) days of the order of court. The attendance of trial counsel, the parties, and a representative, including an insurance carrier, with authority to enter into a full and complete compromise and settlement is mandatory. If trial counsel, the parties, or a representative fail to appear absent good cause, the mediation will not be held and sanctions shall be entered against the non-appearing individual(s) by the Court upon request of the mediator. Sanctions may include an award of reasonable mediator and attorney's fees and other costs.

 e. At least ten (10) days prior to the mediation, each party shall file a mediation statement which must include the following: (1) a succinct explanation of liability and damages; (2) significant legal issues that remain unresolved; (3) summary of medical and expert reports (if applicable); (4) itemized list of damages; and (5) settlement posture and rationale.

 1. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied if a party has previously filed a pre-trial statement pursuant to Washington County Local Rule 212.2, in which case the mediation statement shall only provide updated or additional information.

 2. Failure to file a mediation statement may result in sanctions, if requested by the mediator.

 f. Each party to a case selected for mediation shall pay a mediation fee to be made payable to the County of Washington and submitted to the Office of the District Court Administrator for processing. The mediation fee shall be set by administrative order, and information regarding the fee shall be available in the Office of the District Court Administrator.

 g. If the case has not been resolved, within ten (10) days from the date of the mediation, the mediator shall send the Court a report setting forth the following information: (1) Plaintiff's final settlement demand; (2) Defendant's final settlement offer; (3) the mediator's assessment of liability; (4) the mediator's assessment of damages; (5) the mediator's opinion regarding the potential range of a verdict and the settlement value of the case; and (6) the mediator's recommendation regarding settlement of the case. A copy of the report shall be provided to and maintained by the District Court Administrator until the case is closed.

 h. If the case is resolved and a settlement agreed upon, the mediator shall send a letter to the Judge, with copies to counsel and the District Court Administrator.

 i. The mediator shall not be subpoenaed or requested to testify or produce documents by any party in any pending or subsequent litigation arising out of the same or similar matter. Any party, person, or entity that attempts to compel such testimony or production shall be liable and indemnify the mediator and other protected participants for all reasonable costs, fees and expenses. The mediator shall have the same limited immunity as judges pursuant to the applicable law as it relates to Common Pleas Judges.

 j. Notwithstanding the preceding subsections and L-1042.1—1042.20, the Court may in its discretion set a civil case for an alternative dispute resolution (''ADR'') before a private mediator. The method of selection of the private mediator shall be in the discretion of the Court. All parties shall bear equally the costs of any Court-ordered private mediation; provided, however, that the Court will take appropriate steps to assure that no referral to ADR results in an unfair or unreasonable economic burden on any party.

 Note: When selecting a case for ADR before a private mediator, the Court should consider various criteria, including the nature of the claims involved and their complexity, whether any of the litigants is pro se, the potential for a successful resolution, and the interests of justice.

 (1) The method of ADR shall be addressed to the discretion of the private mediator.

 (2) The fact that a case is selected for ADR shall not delay the scheduled trial of a case.

 (3) Nothing in this rule shall prevent the parties from voluntarily engaging in ADR before a private mediator on their own initiative.

Explanatory Comment

 This local rule reflects the strong judicial policy in favor of parties voluntarily settling lawsuits expressed by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in Rothman v. Fillette, 469 A.2d 543 (Pa. 1983). The use of Court-directed ADR processes reduce the expense of litigation and often times leads to a quicker and more satisfying alternative when compared to continuing on a more traditional path of litigation. An ancillary benefit to ADR is the potential of reducing the burden on the finite resources of the Court.

[Pa.B. Doc. No. 15-1963. Filed for public inspection November 6, 2015, 9:00 a.m.]


No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.

This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.