Mediation Confidentiality Statute Bars Malpractice Claim Where Breach Allegedly Occurred During Mediation

by Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

In Amis v. Greenberg Traurig LLP (No. B248447 - filed March 18, 2015), Division Three of the Second District Court of Appeal held that a malpractice plaintiff cannot circumvent mediation confidentiality by advancing inferences about his former attorney’s supposed acts or omissions during an underlying mediation. In effect, the court followed a 2011 California Supreme Court precedent that established the near categorical prohibition against judicially crafted exceptions to mediation confidentiality statutes.

Plaintiff John Amis (“Amis”) alleged that Greenberg Traurig LLP’s (“GT”) committed “malpractice” in the underlying action by failing to advise him of the risks involved for his personal liability under the proposed settlement agreement and caused him to sign said settlement agreement, which converted his company’s corporate obligations into Amis’s personal obligations. GT’s summary judgment motion was based on Amis’s undisputed admission that all advice he received from GT regarding the settlement agreement was given during a mediation. Based on this undisputed fact, GT argued that Amis could not obtain evidence to support his claims, and GT could not produce evidence to defend itself, based on the prohibition against disclosure of such evidence in the applicable mediation confidentiality statutes, California Evidence Code sections 1115, et seq.

Amis sought to oppose the motion with declarations from himself and counsel in the underlying litigation to establish that he never would have attended the mediation, nor would have agreed to be jointly and severally liable for his company’s obligations, had he been advised prior to the mediation that he had little to no risk of being held personally liable for the underlying claims. Amis also submitted the declaration of his legal malpractice expert who opined that GT’s conduct fell below the standard of care and that “no advice” GT could have given Amis during mediation would have justified making him personally liable to the company’s $2.4 million obligation. The trial court, however, granted GT’s motion for summary judgment, agreeing that Amis could not establish an essential element of his claims because it was undisputed that any act or omission by GT that purportedly caused Amis to execute the settlement agreement occurred during the mediation. The court also refused to accept an inference that GT caused Amis to execute the settlement agreement during the mediation because the applicable statutes effectively barred GT from defending itself against such inference.

Following the California Supreme Court’s decision in Cassel v. Superior Court (2011) 51 Cal.4th 113 (“Cassel”) with a hint of reluctance, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s decision. Cassel also involved a claim by the plaintiff against his former attorneys for legal malpractice arising from a settlement reached during mediation which the plaintiff contended was inadequate. Therein, the Supreme Court upheld the trial court’s order precluding evidence related to the mediation, including private discussions the plaintiff had with his attorneys about the settlement; in so doing, the high court rejected the Court of Appeal majority’s view that “[t[he mediation confidentiality statutes do not extend to communications between a mediation participant and his or her own attorneys outside the presence of other participants in the mediation.” Despite recognizing that its holding could hinder a client’s ability to prove a legal malpractice claim, the Cassel court emphasized that the judiciary had no authority to craft exceptions to the mediation confidentiality statutes despite the equities which might appear to favor such an approach. The Cassel decision effectively shielded attorneys’ actions during mediation from a malpractice action, even if such actions were incompetent or deceptive.

In Amis, the court also examined Amis’s contention that it was reasonable to infer from the fact that GT advised him regarding the settlement agreement that GT had “consented” to Amis executing the agreement at the mediation. The court, however, found that the “proposed inference [was] fundamentally at odds with the mediation confidentiality statute” by “allow[ing] Amis to accomplish indirectly what the statutes prohibit him from doing directly, namely proving that GT advised him to sign the settlement agreement during the mediation.” It would also prevent GT from rebutting that inference with the advice that it actually gave Amis during the mediation.

This decision tackles yet another attempted “end-run” around the mediation confidentiality statutes by rejecting Amis’s inference argument. Courts considering these statutes have made it clear that only the California Legislature may enact exceptions, such as the one unsuccessfully employed by the since de-published Court of Appeal decision prior to the Supreme Court’s holding in Cassel. The Legislature saw fit to enact Evidence Code section 958, which holds that the attorney-client privilege does not apply to communications relevant to the issue of breach of a duty arising out of the lawyer-client relationship. Perhaps it will take on the mediation confidentiality issue as it affects legal malpractice actions.

Written by:

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.