Comments to Civil Rules Proposals on Mediation & Arbitration Due 5/1

The Florida Bar’s Civil Procedure Rules Committee submitted a couple of proposals to the Florida Supreme Court including amendments likely to simplify important rules concerning mediation and arbitration. First, regarding referral of cases under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.700 (Rules Common to Mediation and Arbitration), a judge may enter an order referring all or any part of a case to mediation or arbitration, unless prohibited by law. The parties to any case may agree to mediate or arbitrate any issue at any time. Except as provided in this rule, mediation and arbitration must be conducted in person. This is the new default, even though well over 90% of cases are resolved online since Covid. The judge may order, or the parties may stipulate, that the mediation or arbitration may be conducted through the use of communication technology. To be clear, communication technology must include both audio and video unless all parties stipulate or the judge finds cause. This seems to be due to the fact that many parties of late claim they don't have functioning cameras and some insurance adjusters appear with black screens on Zoom. The proposed amendments would essentially require a mediation or arbitration via remote technology must include both audio and video-- i.e., fully appearing online at the proceeding. In addition, the Civil Rules Committee is proposing amendments to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.820 (Hearing Procedures for Non-Binding Arbitration). The new language would, among other things, require an arbitrator to file with a court a notice of service of the arbitration decision, but not the actual arbitration decision itself. This might eliminate filing under seal which can be difficult for neutrals, depending on the clerk procedures in each county. The party entitled to a judgment if no request for trial de novo is made, or after a trial de novo is conducted, would be required to file the arbitration decision with the court. The proposed amendments would also require that a party file only a written request for trial to reject an arbitrator’s decision, and that a timely request for trial “be construed so as to do substantial justice.” Members of the Committee now agree that it is duplicative and unnecessary for a party to say both that the arbitration award is being deemed rejected and that a trial de novo is being requested. Rather, it is implicit that a request for a trial de novo is a rejection of the arbitration award. See more here-- In Re: Amendments to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.820, Case No. SC2026-0040 and In Re: Amendments to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.700, Case No. SC2025-2041 https://acis.flcourts.gov/portal/search/case

AAA Announces Resolution Simulator At Legal Week

Dubbed a "Dispute Revolution," the American Arbitration Association is launching its Resolution Simulator. Expanding the utility of the previously launched construction AI Arbitrator, the Resolution Simulator uses the same reasoning and analysis as the AI Arbitrator to provide simulated decisions based on the user submissions and feedback. Designed for single party use in documents-only AAA commercial and construction disputes, it promises explainable, informational insights grounded in structured legal reasoning, analysis, and decision logic. Parties may use it to understand how an arbitrator may resolve a dispute, develop their legal or negotiation strategy, or level-set internally with clients or counsel. It may also inform alternative paths to resolution, such as settlement or mediation. Ultimately, AAA hopes the product brings legal teams insight before escalation, empowering strategic decision-making and informing a path to resolution. The latest product launch underscores the AAA's commitment to responsible AI adoption, with governance, transparency, and auditability guiding the design and deployment of all AI-enabled tools. According to the AAA, this effort builds upon their 100-year history of helping parties navigate conflict through fair, transparent, and trusted processes. AI Arbitrator's Resolution Simulator responds to user demand for practical evaluative and decisioning tools, particularly in the early stages of a dispute, by illustrating how an arbitrator might analyze the dispute. See more here-- https://tinyurl.com/4azzjb57 and https://feature.adr.org/LegalWeek2026

Voluntary Trial Resolution Bill

Changes are afoot in Tallahassee with a proposal in the current legislative session to amend the way private judging is done. Chapter 44, Florida Statutes has an option that allows parties in civil disputes to sidestep the delays without relinquishing their right to a jury trial or appeal. Although voluntary trial resolution (VTR), commonly known as private judging, has been in place for more than 25 years, it is rarely invoked with anecdotal stats of around one per year. Incidentally, I did participate in one private civil jury trial in the late 1990s with success. The Florida Bar Business Law Section’s Business Litigation Committee created a task force to identify opportunities to clarify and modernize the process of private judging. After reviewing current Florida law, analyzing relevant case law from other jurisdictions and discussing best practices, the task force concluded clarifying this process might help its use. The current statute, Section 44.104, Florida Statutes, allows parties who agree to private judging choose their own judge, file pleadings with the clerk, and conduct a trial in court or another agreed-upon venue. Uncertainties make most attorneys reluctant to recommend private judging to their clients. The proposed bill aims to close some gaps, giving lawyers more confidence to pursue voluntary trial resolution and helping parties more efficiently resolve disputes. If enacted, the updated statute would give circuit courts the authority to issue orders enforcing the parties’ agreement to pursue voluntary trial resolution, including compelling payment of compensation to the private judge. Decisions made by private judges (whether final or non- final orders) could be reviewed or appealed, just like decisions from circuit judges. At the ADR Section Executive Winter Meeting today, there was a robust discussiom of the substantive changes, as well as things like the use of the courthouse and staff in conducting these trials. Much remains in flux this session and it appears the drafters might have to go back to the drawing board. At present, the bill is likely to die in committee (as it did last year) and so those that are interested in commenting should send your thoughts to the ADR Section care of its administrator: chopkins@floridabar.org See more here-- https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2026/965/BillText/Filed/PDF and https://flabaradr.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/ADR-Section-Common-Ground-FallWinter-2025.pdf and https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2026/965/

Orlando Mediator Blog Now Top 3!

Since 2010, the aim of this blog is simply to bring awareness to the profession of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) through assorted entries about mediation, arbitration and other forms of acting as a neutral online. Once again, Orlando Mediator blog received the honor of being named top among dispute resolution blogs out of the 80 best ranked on the web by traffic, social media followers, domain authority and freshness. I'm still maintaining some good company on this list with established dispute resolution blogs around the world that actually have paid professional writers and journalists. Orlando Mediator is recognized by Feedspot along with such distinguished blogs published by big names like Kluwer and Thomson Reuters and even above those by prominent ADR organizations like the American Arbitration Association (AAA), The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (Ciarb), ODR.com, Miles, NAM, ADR times and International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution (CPR). Feedspot's experts chose Orlando Mediator for what their founder calls the most comprehensive list of Dispute Resolution Blogs on the planet! Feedspot says it is the internet’s largest human curated database of bloggers and podcasts. Their list combines RSS feeds allowing users to keep track of many different websites in a single news aggregator. I am humbled again to know this labor of love for my chosen field of peacemaking is appreciated. I do enjoy keeping everyone informed on the latest trends and happenings in mediation and related fields through this outlet. Thanks again for your readership and support in 2026! https://rss.feedspot.com/dispute_resolution_rss_feeds/

FL Nonbinding Arbitration Rules Clarification

The standing Civil Rules Committee of The Florida Bar seeks to amend Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.820 after confusion arising from People’s Trust Ins. Co. v. Hernandez, 413 So. 3d 127 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025) where the Fourth District Court of Appeal interpreted nonbinding arbitration notice language as requiring a party to state both that it was “rejecting” the arbitration decision and that it was “requesting a trial” in the written filing. In Hernandez, while the party filed a request for trial de novo, the request did not include language that the party was “rejecting” the arbitration award. The court said the request for trial de novo did not strictly comply with Rule 1.820 (h) and was therefore ineffective. When the Civil Rules Committee last proposed amending Rule 1.820, it was not their intention to create a requirement to use “magic words” to reject an arbitration award-- it was to create a requirement that a request for trial de novo be accomplished by a written filing. Members of the committee now agree that it is duplicative and unnecessary for a party to say both that the arbitration award is being rejected and that a trial de novo is being requested. Rather, it is implicit that a request for a trial de novo is a rejection of the arbitration award. There was also a concern that article I, section 22, Florida Constitution states “[t]he right of trial by jury shall be secure to all and remain inviolate” and a procedural rule should not invade that right by creating a trap for the unwary. To address the Hernandez decision’s interpretation, Civil Rules proposes amending subdivision (h) to clarify that only a written request for trial need be filed; the filing does not have to be a “notice of rejection of the arbitration decision and request for trial.” This is now an official rules amendment petition case pending before the Florida Supreme Court found here-- https://acis.flcourts.gov/portal/court/68f021c4-6a44-4735-9a76-5360b2e8af13/case/14463DCF-4E3D-428D-B801-B5BC1DC7570A and case that brought about the need for clarification-- https://law.justia.com/cases/florida/fourth-district-court-of-appeal/2025/4d2024-3274.html

Orlando Film Premiere: Voice of the Mediation Client 1/21!

Join us at the Orange County Bar Association in Orlando on January 21, 2026 at noon for a film screening and esteemed panel with lunch included! This program is a collaboration of OCBA’s ADR Committee and the ADR Section of The Florida Bar that have come together for an engaging course on advanced mediation strategies designed for litigators, mediators, in-house counsel, and other dispute resolution professionals. Along with exploring cutting-edge techniques, we will cover essential ethical responsibilities for lawyers and mediators. Participants will also receive a link to the latest Florida Mediation Best Practices Handbook, packed with proven strategies, practical tools, ethics rules, and federal and state mediation forms to strengthen mediation performance and client outcomes. I will participate in an esteemed panel of experienced trial lawyers, a United States Magistrate Judge and veteran mediator colleagues. We will lead a dynamic discussion during breaks in the screening of “The Voice of the Client,” an eye-opening film just produced by the Florida Bar’s Alternative Dispute Resolution Section. Through powerful real-life stories, attendees will gain new perspectives on how clients experience mediation. The session is sure to spark meaningful discussions on preparation, communication, and how mediator techniques impact outcomes, helping participants elevate their mediation practice. Registration information here-- https://flabaradr.com/events/the-ocba-adr-committee-and-the-adr-section-of-the-florida-bar-presents-the-voice-of-the-client/ and direct link-- https://orangecountybar.org/events/register.aspx?id=1995577&itemid=786cc0e9-5ee8-4757-9388-b03a47a76f1c

Practice Playbook Podcast Appearance

So thrilled to be asked to join Susan Guthrie on The Practice Playbook Podcast where we talk about getting back to the basics in what we do in the face of unjustified fears like: "Is AI replacing mediators?" Dispute resolution professionals are likely asking this right now because technology is so rapidly advancing. AI tools are everywhere and virtual practice is the norm. In our conversation, we find AI is not actually replacing mediators. It doesn't replace skill, rather it is helpful to automating scheduling, helping to summarize documents and making more information instantly accessible. What remains human is the mediator’s judgment, presence and ability to guide people through uncertainty. Technology reduces friction, not responsibility. Strong mediators become more visible in this environment. Their preparation is clearer. Their instincts are sharper. Their ability to read people and manage dynamics stands out. Technology does not resolve complex cases, but can help better define them. However, lived experience and intuition are what still drive successful mediation outcomes. AI systems cannot read a room yet! No algorithm can sense hesitation, fear, or strategic posturing in real time. No tool can decide when to push, when to pause, or when silence is doing the work. Those decisions come from vast experience. They come from curiosity and instincts developed over hundreds or thousands of cases. These are not skills that can be automated. They are earned. Mediation is fundamentally a human process. It relies on judgment, trust, and the ability to guide people through uncertainty, none of which can be replaced by technology. More data does not always produce better outcomes. One challenge in today’s mediation environment is the information paradox. Parties have access to more data than ever, yet clarity is often harder to achieve. Excess documentation, poorly timed disclosures, and last-minute revelations can slow progress instead of advancing it. Discernment is perhaps one of the most valuable skills a mediator brings to the room in this age. Knowing what matters, when it matters, and how to use information strategically is not a technical function. It is a professional one. Until real AGI? Give us a listen on the first episode of the new year here-- https://bit.ly/PPP-Lawrence-Kolin