Originially from: World Arbitration and Mediation Review (WAMR) 

Mediation Case Law: 2003 in Review
by
James Coben, Editor Domestic Mediation, WAMR
Professor of Law and Director, Hamline University School of Law,
Dispute Resolution Institute
1. “The Enforcement of Mediated Settlements”
State Supreme Courts
Caballero v. Wikse, No. 27995, 2003 WL 21697914 (Idaho July 23, 2003) (reversing
district court and refusing to enforce mediated settlement of wrongful discharge claim negotiated
by plaintiff’s attorney, having concluded that attorney lacked express authority to wholly and
finally compromise all claims, despite evidence showing that: (1) plaintiff’s attorney and
mediator made representations regarding plaintiff’s attorney’s authority; (2) plaintiff left the
mediation before it ended knowing that ground rules required someone with settlement authority
to be present; and (3) plaintiff specifically authorized attorney to make a counterproposal in
response to defendant’s most recent offer). [Editor’s Note: this opinion has been withdrawn and
superseded by No. 27995, 2004 WL 858710 (Idaho Apr. 22, 2004) (affirming the district court
and enforcing the mediated settlement)].
Calpano v. State, 832 A.2d 1250 (Del. Super. Ct. Sept. 25, 2003) (table) (affirming
dismissal of complaint seeking the enforcement of an arbitration agreement allegedly reached in
mediation, in circumstances in which the parties disputed that an agreement ever existed and
there was no written agreement other than a document purported to be an agreement signed by
the attorney for the party seeking to compel arbitration).
Quote from the Court: “Courts should not enforce a mediation agreement
absent a written document signed by the parties and the mediator. As the Vice
Chancellor stated: ‘the candid disclosure that mediation seeks to encourage in an
effort to resolve a legal dispute, would be chilled if this Court were to enforce
partial agreements—agreements to resolve some of the dispute that have not
reached a stage where a contract is actually signed. If such agreements were
enforced, the chilling effect would discourage the type of candid discussions that
are necessary in order for a mediation to work at all.’”
Catamount Slate Products, Inc. v. Sheldon, 845 A.2d 324 (Vt. Dec. 19, 2003) (reversing
trial court and refusing to enforce alleged oral mediated settlement in circumstances in which the
intent of the parties to be bound was not established in light of: (1) an unsigned agreement to
mediate discussed orally with the parties which expressly stated that mediation would not be
“binding upon either party unless reduced to a final agreement of settlement”; (2) post-mediation
letters implying that settlement was not final; and (3) evidence suggesting that material elements
of a global settlement remained to be negotiated after conclusion of mediation):