Showing posts with label AAA arbitrator. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AAA arbitrator. Show all posts

Thursday, March 19, 2026

Mediation Magazine Article

So pleased to be published in this month's Mediation Magazine, a new offering from the American Arbitration Association (AAA). Mediation Magazine features a diverse range of articles and other media, including commentary on emerging trends in domestic and international mediation, case studies and lessons learned, interviews with thought leaders, innovations in mediation process design, research summaries, ethical considerations, and cross-cultural perspectives. It also offers practice-oriented content such as negotiation techniques, mediator toolkits, and dispute system design strategies. According to AAA, articles are written by leading voices in the field—practicing mediators, legal professionals, academics, and dispute resolution experts—and are complemented by interactive features such as videos to enrich engagement and accessibility. Published continuously throughout the year, Mediation Magazine aims to inform, inspire, and connect professionals committed to advancing effective, fair, and forward-looking mediation practices globally. I serve on the national panels for AAA commerical mediation and arbitraion. Though the now hundred-year-old non-profit organization has arbitration in the name, it maintains a robust mediation program. There is a growing prevalence among those drafting business contracts of including clauses requiring mediation as a precondition to initiating a lawsuit or arbitration. Disputes arising from contract obligations can be complex, technical, and even structural. Issues regarding the formation, interpretation, or enforcement of obligations invite evidentiary disputes over the circumstances surrounding the making and performance of the subject agreement. Most disputes result from the breakdown of a relationship, so I thought I'd expound on what happens in business cases and give some practical perspectives. Commercial mediators are able to ascertain the root cause of that breakdown and often help parties self-determine the outcome and avoid going to court or arbitration to get a resolution. See more here-- https://mediationmagazine.adr.org/practical-perspectives-on-commercial-mediation/

Monday, March 9, 2026

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

Saturday, November 1, 2025

15 Years of Orlando Mediator

This month marks fifteen years since I began writing this blog to help keep the legal community abreast of the latest goings-on in mediation, arbitration and other emerging forms of dispute resolution. This blog has been recognized as an official ABA "Blawg" by the American Bar Association, voted as a finalist for The Expert Institute Best Legal Blog in the Legal News category, as top blawgs to follow by ADR Times and a current Top 5 Dispute Resolution Blog on Feedspot.com. My first entry had to do with arbitration as a process criticized by consumer advocates and that remains true today, though it is becoming utilized by more industries in contracts and is even being employed by courts under statutory processes, like nonbinding arbitration. Some things that have changed are the remote nature of these processes, especially since Covid. These changes advanced the use of then state of the art technology like Zoom, now comfortably utilized by professionals, parties and their counsel alike. We are getting past early days of the artificial intelligence boom and looking for ways to ethically use the power of AI as a settlement tool, while maintaining the human touch that has led to deals over the past 3,000 years of this profession. My alternative dispute resolution practice has continually evolved since first becoming certified in Circuit-Civil mediation in 2001 by the Florida Supreme Court and serving as a full-time neutral since 2010. Over that time, I have helped to bring about thousands of resolutions of multi-party complex cases in state and federal trial courts. I've also facilitated post-trial settlements with appellate cases pending in Florida's 5th and 6th District Courts of Appeal which are still the only DCAs to maintain formal civil mediation programs. Courts are extremely backlogged, so as litigation costs continue to rise, early settlements make sense in regular matters. Pre-suit mediation is trending beyond statutory requirements and can be quite effective if the parties have just enough information to evaluate their positions in the potential litigation. Mediation is essential to America's courts and remains the most popular of docket-culling measures. Thanks for your readership and attention to my musings and thought leadership about all things in modern-day peacemaking.

Thursday, October 16, 2025

Future of AI in ADR

For Mediation Week 2025, I will recount my observations from attending the American Arbitration Association's (AAA) Future of Dispute Resolution Conference in New York, dealing with the advent of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Taking place at Cardozo Law School in conjunction with the International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution (CPR) and sponsored by the Practising Law Institute (PLI), this dynamic conference with Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) professionals, lawyer advocates, in-house counsel, programmers and developers explored how AI is transforming arbitration, mediation, and online dispute resolution (ODR). Legaltech innovators, institutional leaders and practitioners had quite interactive debates, a live demonstration of AAA's upcoming AI-trained construction arbitration product being launched next month (still requiring human oversight), and some real-world case studies. Humans are not being replaced, rather augmented in their skills and time management. Experience in the field cannot be simply replaced by machine, though AI's influence on dispute prevention cannot be understated. It will impact process, integrity, ethics and certainly case resolution outcomes. At the conclusion of the program, online dispute resolution pioneer, Colin Rule, opined that AI was really better suited as a tool to help both parties and neutrals in mediation, moreso than arbitration. The Future Dispute Resolution New York Hackathon the following day was hosted at AAA in Manhattan and included the Wolters Kluwer Arbitration digital experience team. This collaborative workshop paired neutrals with staff technologists and coders. Guided by product designers, engineers, and user experience (UX) experts, we collaborated forming interdisciplinary teams to identify practical pain points in the dispute resolution lifecycle and to rapidly prototype technology solutions from dispute prevention alerting tools to court service portals for self-represented entrepreneurs. Building on the success of the Future Dispute Resolution Hague Hackathon, our teams brainstormed in the morning and developed next-gen ADR demos in the afternoon, aiming to make dispute resolution processes faster, more equitable, and less expensive. The presentations from nine teams at the end of the day were quite impressive, given the compressed time to develop apps. Our team created "NeutralLens" an AI product for more efficiently distilling document submissions. For accuracy, our team utilized a Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) an AI framework that enhances a large language model (LLM) by allowing it to retrieve relevant information from an external knowledge base to produce more up-to-date and trustworthy responses. It was all very inspiring and we hope will lead to a better experience for those utilizing ADR to get better access to justice outside the court system. See more here-- https://go.adr.org/2025-future-of-dispute-resolution-hackathon and https://www.adr.org/news-and-insights/ai-in-construction-disputes/

Friday, January 12, 2024

Orlando Mediator Top 5

Since 2010, upon my becoming a full-time neutral, I have tried to bring awareness to our little corner of the world in Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) through blogging about mediation and arbitration online. Once again, the Orlando Mediator blog received the honor of being named in the top five and moved up to fourth among Alternative Dispute Resolution blogs out of sixty ranked on the web by traffic, social media followers, domain authority and freshness. I'm certainly in some good company on this list with established dispute resolution blogs around the world that actually have professional writers. Orlando Mediator is recognized by Feedspot among the best, including such distinguished blogs published by big names like Kluwer and even above those by prominent ADR organizations like the American Arbitration Association (AAA), The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (Ciarb) and International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution (CPR). Feedspot's experts chose Orlando Mediator as number four in the world 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 to know this labor of love for my chosen field 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 over the years! The full list is available here-- https://legal.feedspot.com/dispute_resolution_blogs/ and https://rss.feedspot.com/dispute_resolution_rss_feeds/

Monday, October 2, 2023

Now Available as AAA Panelist

Orlando Mediator Lawrence Kolin is now available as a panel neutral for the American Arbitration Asoociation (AAA). Though Lawrence was a party-selected AAA arbitrator and mediator in the past, and has even presented educational programs in conjunction with AAA, he has officially become a member for purposes of resolving cases under the auspices of AAA. As a reminder, Mediation is used to resolve a broad range of conflicts within a variety of settings. Mediation is a process in which an impartial third party facilitates communication and negotiation and promotes voluntary decision making by the parties to the dispute. Mediation agreements may be included as part of a contract that specifies what procedures will govern the mediation process. Alternatively, parties frequently agree to mediate following the onset of a dispute regardless of whether their contract stipulates mediation as a means of resolution, or when there is no contract between the parties. Mediation serves various purposes, including providing the opportunity for parties to define and clarify issues, understand different perspectives, identify interests, explore and assess possible solutions, and reach mutually satisfactory agreements, when desired. See more here-- https://tinyurl.com/bdzj99bw

Monday, November 2, 2020

ADR Arbitration Advocacy Institute 11/13!

Please join me this month at the ADR Section of The Florida Bar's inaugural Arbitration Advocacy Institute. This innovative program is a one-day, online workshop for attorney-arbitrators that will provide coaching on mechanics, technology and professionalism to help Florida attorneys boost their arbitration advocacy skills. Attendees will increase their knowledge of the arbitration process from beginning to end-- distinct from mediation and litigation-- and participate in virtual clinics for diverse arbitration practice areas. prestigious faculty of over 30 presenters will demonstrate effective and ethical techniques that will enable participants to reach the highest levels of advocacy in arbitration. Login on Friday, November 13, 2020 from 8:45 a.m. to 6 p.m. with an optional virtual networking hour on November 12 at 5:30 p.m. This course has been approved for 8.5 General CLE credits in Florida 1.0 of which may be applied toward Professionalism, and 1.0 Technology credit. Participants earn 1.5 additional General CLE credits for participation in a Virtual Clinic. Section members $185, non-section members $230 and law students just $60 (includes ADR Section membership)See more information and registration details here-- https://flabaradr.com/arbitration-advocacy-institute and https://bit.ly/3kRtgaz



Thursday, October 1, 2020

Rare Florida Case Addresses Arbitrability

This year, a Florida district court of appeal chose to delve into what they saw as a "rather arcane" issue in arbitration of who decides whether a dispute is subject to a contract's arbitration provision: an arbitrator or a judge? There are many recent decisions from around the country deferring to the arbitrator. However, the majority explains the contract's provision in this case did not provide clear and unmistakable evidence that only the arbitrator could decide the issue of arbitrability. Unbeknownst to the renter of an Airbnb, the host had installed hidden cameras throughout the unit. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant secretly recorded the entire stay in the unit. For this violation of privacy, a lawsuit was filed in state court. Airbnb then filed a motion to compel arbitration. Airbnb argued the claims were subject to arbitration through Airbnb's Terms of Service, under which the renter agreed to be bound to pursuant to a "clickwrap" agreement. The arbitration provision contained fairly standard language such as "You acknowledge and agree that you and Airbnb are each waiving the right to a trial by jury." The court held that the clickwrap agreement's arbitration provision and the AAA rule it referenced that addresses an arbitrator's authority to decide arbitrability did not, in themselves, arise to "clear and unmistakable" evidence that the parties intended to remove the court's presumed authority to decide such questions. The evidence on what these parties may have agreed to about the "who decides" arbitrability question was considered ambiguous. Therefore, the trial court retained its presumed authority to decide the arbitrability dispute. A conflict with decisions from other districts was certified. See full opinion here-- https://tinyurl.com/y4oyxsgv



Friday, November 30, 2018

TRO issued in Jay-Z AAA Arbitration

An injunction was issued this week by a New York judge in favor of Jay-Z on the grounds that the lack of African-American arbitrators provided by the American Arbitration Association (AAA) impeded his right to equal opportunity under the law. Judge Saliann Scarpulla issued a temporary restraining order, pushing arbitration back to next month at the earliest. The dispute involves Iconix, which acquired Rocawear in 2007, and sued the rapper last year for allegedly breaching their 2007 contract by using the Roc Nation logo on a new line of baseball caps. A countersuit argues that the contract applied only to Rocawear and not Roc Nation, at which point both parties entered AAA arbitration. Jay-Z claims AAA found only three potential African-American arbitrators, out of the hundreds it uses, for his case, and one already represented Iconix in related litigation. To begin the process, the AAA typically provides parties with a list of potential arbitrators from which they must eliminate names until they arrive at one. Reportedly, Jay-Z maintains that white arbitrators exhibit “unconscious bias” towards black defendants, and that the AAA’s lack of racial diversity consequently “deprives litigants of colour of a meaningful opportunity to have their claims heard by a panel of arbitrators reflecting their backgrounds and life experience.” His lawyers claim arbitration procedures in place by the AAA “deprive black litigants...of the equal protection of the laws, equal access to public accommodations, and mislead consumers into believing that they will receive a fair and impartial adjudication.” Although the ruling may not stop the proceeding altogether, it could set an important precedent for addressing diversity in neutral selection. See full news stories here-- https://bit.ly/2RpXHpr and https://nbcnews.to/2KIkQkm

Friday, June 30, 2017

Summary Judgment in Arbitration

Arbitration has become formal of late and has been criticized by scholars as costly, time-consuming and subject to hardball advocacy. See Stipanowich, Arbitration: The “New Litigation” University of Illinois Law Review Vol. 2010, No. 1. This trend is not surprising given that career litigators, having been trained in the techniques of discovery and motion practice, are hesitant stepping outside their comfort zone. See JAMS Dispositive Motions in Arbitration, Kleinberg, Summer 2015. This includes the increasing filing of Motions for Summary Judgment, mostly following rule changes in 2013 by AAA allowing them. Winning a dispositive motion in any forum is difficult. For example, statistical analyses of federal courts in three large districts showed that summary judgments are granted less than 10% of the time. See Id. While arbitrators have the authority to consider motions for summary disposition, arbitrators must take great care in exercising this power. Avoiding increasing the costs of the proceedings and/or delaying its conclusion must be paramount. How sound is the motion and what is its likelihood of success? Are there issues of fact that would preclude ruling in favor of the motion? Will the motion, if granted, really reduce costs and expedite the arbitration, or will it lead to just the opposite result? In many cases, striking a few claims or defenses of several asserted would not serve to abbreviate the proceedings. Consideration of a motion not likely to succeed will waste time and money. The cost and dilatory impact of court-style motion practice, where the making of dispositive motions is the norm, is precisely what arbitration should avoid. See Reflections on the Use of Dispositive Motions in Arbitration By Edna Sussman and Solomon Ebere, NYSBA New York Dispute Resolution Lawyer, Spring 2011, Vol. 4, No. 1. Such motions can only be considered if facts upon which the dispositive motion is made are not in dispute. Granting dispositive motions could be viewed as depriving parties of a fair proceeding. Arbitrators must also ensure that they have carefully considered any discovery requests by the opposing party. If a party is denied requested discovery that is material to the motion and could alter the result, there would likely be a finding that the party was denied its right to a fundamentally fair proceeding. See Id. As an arbitrator, I am not against streamlining a case-- just be careful in considering the potential challenges to final awards that defeat the purpose of an efficient process with finality.

Wednesday, December 30, 2015

Join me 1/19 for Arbitration Backlash CLE webinar

This month, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its third decision in the last four years upholding private-party contracts to arbitrate rather than to litigate disputes. Arbitration, however, continues to be attacked by media and government despite being an effective ADR method to resolve disputes and control the rising cost of trying lawsuits. Federal law supports and governs the practice through the Federal Arbitration Act. To be enforceable, a clause must provide a meaningful opportunity for redress, and courts review contractual provisions for fundamental fairness. Because the litigation system has become so expensive, arbitration is often the preferred forum for disputes involving amounts in controversy for which litigation of claims is uneconomical. Next month, UWWM will feature this topic in its complimentary webinar entitled, Arbitration Backlash. Arbitrators Lawrence Kolin and Brandon Peters, along with our guest Phil Calandrino, will explore the backlash against arbitration and remind attendees of the origins and benefits of this dispute resolution process. This content is designed for trial lawyers who represent clients in arbitration and for attorneys who use arbitration clauses in contracts. Attending our complimentary Webinar will entitle you to 1 hour of General CLE credit, pending with The Florida Bar. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining us Tuesday, January 19, 2016 from 12:00 PM - 1:00 PM EST We look forward to your attendance! See registration information here-- https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/5506879070378935041

Monday, December 9, 2013

Hyundai Drops Arbitration Clause

A policy that required some warranty disputes to be settled through binding arbitration, unless owners notified Hyundai within 90 days of purchasing the vehicle of their decision to opt-out of the arrangement, was recently dropped. Following an article about the arbitration requirement that appeared in The New York Times’s Automobiles section, Hyundai issued a statement saying it would change the policy. Hyundai said it didn't want the public to be misled that it would not stand behind "America’s best warranty.” Hyundai claims it has only used arbitration ten times since 2006. Under the earlier policy, failing to opt-out may have disqualified owners from joining class actions or collecting refunds if their vehicle was determined to be a lemon. Formerly binding arbitration was administered by the American Arbitration Association with owners paying a part of the cost and decisions not subject to appeal. Owners choosing to opt-out could seek resolution elsewhere, including court. Reportedly, notice directly from the automaker printed in the owner’s manual is unusual, according to consumer advocates. Hyundai previously maintained giving owners 90 days to opt-out of arbitration was fair notice included in the vehicle warranty brochure. Owners could still file lemon law, product liability or personal injury lawsuits. See article here-- http://nyti.ms/18wm7U3