Document Type

Article

Publication Date

12-2025

Journal Title

Harvard Negotiation Law Review

ISSN

2169-8015

Abstract

When proponents initially urged the courts to institutionalize mediation for the resolution of general civil cases, they argued that the procedure would be superior to trial—and also to lawyers’ settlement negotiations—in terms of parties’ exercise of self-determination, satisfaction with outcomes, and opportunity for voice. These claims, however, rested on certain assumptions, particularly regarding the implementation of mediation and lawyers’ settlement negotiations. In mediation, the parties were to take center stage, with the mediator assisting them by facilitating their communication and negotiation so that they could reach a customized resolution. Lawyers’ settlement negotiations in general civil litigation, meanwhile, were assumed to be lawyeronly affairs that excluded the clients. Since then, scholars and other observers have often written about how much mediation has evolved. In the contemporary legal landscape, one of the models used frequently in the courts (and by private providers as well) is an evaluative, lawyer-and-caucus-dominated procedure. The evolution of lawyers’ practice in settlement negotiations has not received commensurate attention. Data has begun to suggest, however, that a substantial percentage of these negotiations may include the clients. We propose that this “client-inclusive” approach to lawyers’ settlement negotiations might outperform—or at least match the performance of—the lawyer-dominated evaluative model of mediation, using many of the same criteria initially used to promote mediation. Paradoxically, just as arbitration has evolved into the “new litigation” and mediation has become the “new arbitration,” lawyers’ client-inclusive negotiations could represent the “new mediation.” If this is so, courts should also evolve by considering the use of “client-inclusive” negotiations to satisfy judicial orders to participate in mediation and law schools should prepare students to competently implement this procedure.

First Page

1

Last Page

51

Num Pages

51

Volume Number

30

Issue Number

1

Publisher

Harvard Law School

File Type

PDF

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.