FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W321045598> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W321045598 startingPage "94" @default.
• W321045598 abstract "This article originally appeared in the November 2011 Professional Liability Committee Newsletter. In January of this year, the California Supreme Court reaffirmed more than a decade of jurisprudence that provides nearly impenetrable confidentiality for communications made pursuant to mediation--even where such communications are offered as evidence of legal malpractice. (1) The court in Cassel v. Superior Court relied on a line of cases stemming from Foxgate Homeowners' Association v. Bramalea California. (2) Despite pleas from statutorily hamstrung Courts of Appeal in the intervening years between Foxgate and Cassel, the California Legislature has yet to revisit the mediation confidentiality statutes, which have produced documented inequitable results. (3) The specific statute interpreted by Foxgate and its progeny is contained within the California Evidence Code. (4) Section 1119 provides that [n]o evidence of anything said or any admission made for the purpose of, in the course of, or pursuant to, a mediation or mediation consultation is admissible or subject to discovery. (5) When read in conjunction with the California Rules of Professional Conduct, Section 1119 creates a significant ethical dilemma for attorneys who wish to counsel their clients in mediation. (6) Because the Rules of Professional Conduct prohibit contracts between lawyers and clients that limit the lawyer's liability for malpractice, the simple act of contracting to attend a mediation could be construed as malpractice by the lawyer. (7) The defendant attorneys in Cassel apparently faced no such considerations. Instead, the Supreme Court of California in Cassel considered attorney malpractice in the context of mediation itself. (8) The defendant attorneys had represented the plaintiff in a dispute regarding rights to the Von Dutch clothing label. (9) The plaintiff alleged malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and breach of contract. Michael Cassel acquired a license to sell Von Dutch clothing, and subsequently formed VDO, a corporation that would distribute the clothing. The defendant attorneys from Wasserman, Comden, Casselman & Pearson, L.L.P. (WCCP) represented Cassel in a dispute over ownership of VDO, which Cassel lost. (10) He continued selling the clothing regardless, and WCCP failed to oppose an injunction filed by VDO, which was granted. (11) WCCP nevertheless advised Cassel to sell Von Dutch goods in Asia and through an online business of one of WCCP's attorneys. These facts led VDO and Cassel to a pretrial mediation. During the fourteen-hour mediation, Cassel remained insistent that he receive no less than $2,000,000 from VDO for the assignment of his license to sell Von Dutch products, but he alleged that attorneys from WCCP harassed and coerced him into not accepting $1,250,000. There was evidence that Cassel and his attorneys had agreed prior to the mediation that this amount was too low. In the ensuing legal malpractice action, WCCP moved in limine to exclude evidence of such pre-mediation discussions and of any alleged coercion during the mediation itself. (12) The motion was granted, but reversed by the California Court of Appeals--thus giving the California Supreme Court the opportunity to revisit Foxgate and the effect of its holding on malpractice law in that state. (13) While the California Supreme Court acknowledged the arguments made by the Court of Appeals, it reversed based on a professed inability to permit a judicial exception to the plain language of the California Code of Evidence. (14) The court reasoned that judicial exceptions to statutes are only permitted where due process rights are implicated, or where literal application of a statute would produce absurd results. (15) The court noted an available exception to absolute mediation confidentiality where the parties expressly agree in writing to disclose mediation settlements, as long as all of the statutory requirements for disclosure are also met. …" @default.
• W321045598 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W321045598 creator A5031303848 @default.
• W321045598 creator A5040348170 @default.
• W321045598 date "2012-01-01" @default.
• W321045598 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W321045598 title "Mediation as Malpractice? the Effect of California Mediation Confidentiality Statutes" @default.
• W321045598 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W321045598 type Work @default.
• W321045598 sameAs 321045598 @default.
• W321045598 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W321045598 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W321045598 hasAuthorship W321045598A5031303848 @default.
• W321045598 hasAuthorship W321045598A5040348170 @default.
• W321045598 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W321045598 hasConcept C17319257 @default.
• W321045598 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W321045598 hasConcept C179420905 @default.
• W321045598 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W321045598 hasConcept C2776798817 @default.
• W321045598 hasConcept C2777834853 @default.
• W321045598 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W321045598 hasConcept C2778449503 @default.
• W321045598 hasConcept C71745522 @default.
• W321045598 hasConceptScore W321045598C144024400 @default.
• W321045598 hasConceptScore W321045598C17319257 @default.
• W321045598 hasConceptScore W321045598C17744445 @default.
• W321045598 hasConceptScore W321045598C179420905 @default.
• W321045598 hasConceptScore W321045598C199539241 @default.
• W321045598 hasConceptScore W321045598C2776798817 @default.
• W321045598 hasConceptScore W321045598C2777834853 @default.
• W321045598 hasConceptScore W321045598C2778272461 @default.
• W321045598 hasConceptScore W321045598C2778449503 @default.
• W321045598 hasConceptScore W321045598C71745522 @default.
• W321045598 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W321045598 hasLocation W3210455981 @default.
• W321045598 hasOpenAccess W321045598 @default.
• W321045598 hasPrimaryLocation W3210455981 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W1492145993 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W1496807101 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W1525663016 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W1589621658 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W232629715 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W237098460 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W242775724 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W256837321 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W2592937413 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W293387767 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W305732082 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W3121609931 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W3121751024 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W3126056155 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W796043641 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W840083088 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W853427604 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W172940862 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W2603449633 @default.
• W321045598 hasRelatedWork W2604042302 @default.
• W321045598 hasVolume "79" @default.
• W321045598 isParatext "false" @default.
• W321045598 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W321045598 magId "321045598" @default.
• W321045598 workType "article" @default.