In This Issue:

- In Depth: Engaging Neutrals for Mock Exercises Provides Invaluable Insight

- ADR Conversations: More Energy, More Deals, More Disputes Domestic Focus: Mandatory Mediation Programs Successful in Clearing Dockets

- Good Works: Holy Mediation! The Good Shepherd Mediation Program Celebrates 30 Years of Peacemaking in Philadelphia

- International Focus: Chinese Companies' Investment in U.S. Results in Greater Interaction with U.S. Legal System and ADR Processes

- Worth Reading: The Small Big: Small Changes That Spark Big Influence

- Excerpt from In Depth: Engaging Neutrals for Mock Exercises Provides Invaluable Insight:

Not long ago, lawyer Roland Tellis was handling a high-stakes securities case involving alleged investment fraud and was facing an upcoming summary judgment motion in advance of a settlement conference. As part of his preparation, Tellis hired three JAMS neutrals, all retired district court judges and all with similar profiles to the real judge in the case in terms of number of years on the bench and specialties practiced before judging. The three neutrals were asked to give wholly blind opinions of the summary judgment motion, meaning none of them knew which side was asking for the mock ruling. The neutrals were given 10 days—and a 10- to 20-hour limit—to read the pleadings and provide a reasoned opinion. All three neutrals decided the case the same way, but for three widely different reasons. The case wound up settling.

“I would do it again, for sure,” Tellis says of hiring neutrals for the neutral analysis exercise.