Legal Question in Mediation in California

A mediation typically involves the parties to the action, so you should be there unless you have authorized your attorney to settle the matter in your absence. The procedures are determined by the mediator's approach to the mediation process. He can treat it as a settlement conference and be very directive and evaluative. Otherwise it is up to the parties to reach a mutually agreeable solution. The purpose of a mediation as noted is to reach an agreement between the parties. It is possible that you might agree to drop your case, but normally the purpose is to reach an agreement that will settle the action. Setting a mediation does not mean that the case will settle. Just think about what you feel is reasonable and work toward that goal. Good luck.

Mr. Goff basically gave you a correct answer, but perhaps not as clear as would be best. As a mediator and arbitrator, let me give you my $0.02. A mediation is, at it's core, a facilitated settlement discussion. By relatively recent statutes it is also entirely confidential except to the minimum extent necessary to enforce any settlement agreement that is reached in the mediation. What all mediations have in common is an opportunity for you and the other side to have discussions with each other, either directly or more commonly through "shuttle diplomacy" between two rooms, about your views of the case and what can be done to settle it. These discussions are helped along by a trained neutral person, the mediator. There are various personal and systemic dynamics that allow a trained mediator to guide discussions toward settlement in ways that are blocked by the dynamics of traditional litigation negotiations between your lawyers or even you and the other side. One of the things that a trained mediator can do is provide their evaluation of the merits of each side's case. People are more willing to listen to a neutral tell them about problems with their case and strengths of the other side's case, then they will ever be hearing the other side say it. And that is just one example of how the mediator can nurture a settlement where the parties alone or through thier attorneys will fail. In my experience, both as a mediator and as an attorney representing parties in mediation, mediation is ultimately successful in settling over 90% of the cases in which it is used, though sometimes not in the first session, and sometimes only after the formal mediation is over and the parties think about things for a while. But ultimately it is very effective at settling cases. One of the key reasons is that unlike an arbitration or a trial, no one ever says who wins or loses a mediation. Both sides only settle if they can accept the settlement and move on. If there is never an offer on the table that you can live with, you don't settle. No obligation, maybe a little pressure from the mediator if that is called for, but you are always free to say "no." And if the case does not settle, it just goes forward as normal litigation as if the mediation had not occured.

Most mediators will order the parties to be present to help facilitate settlement and approve any settlement if one is reached.

The mediator will discuss the liability and damage aspects of the case and try to push the parties into the middle where the case can settle. The mediator is going to want to hear from you how you were injured and who better than yourself to communicate how this injury has impacted your daily life.