Join me and a federal judge 7/10 for free noon CME/CLE!

My old colleague from the United States Attorney's Office in the early 1990s, current U.S. District Judge Paul G. Byron, and I will give a lunchtime Zoom for the ADR Section of The Florida Bar July 10, 2026 at noon ET about conducting federal mediation in the Middle District of Florida, as well as nuances in the Northern District and Southern District. We aim to dispel the impression that mediation in federal cases is somehow different or more difficult. In fact, the similarities are actually greater than the differences. All three federal district courts in Florida: Routinely require mediation; Treat mediation as part of case management; Require attendance by decision-makers; Protect confidentiality; and Expect counsel to participate seriously. Where they differ is primarily in local rules and administration. Attendees of this alternative dispute resolution online presentation will leave with a better understanding of how mediation functions as a structural component of federal civil practice in Florida, including magistrate judge-directed settlement conferences. Our program walks through the authority for mediation under federal rules, how each district implements the process differently, and if "good faith" truly means anything in federal court. Please provide your name and email address to register for this free CLE event. Once you have registered, you will be on the list to receive an email containing the Zoom Link to attend this course. If you do not receive a Zoom link by July 10th at 10 am, please email-- flabaradr@gmail.com. Thank you! See more info and register here-- https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeJR7UPUqLb1vES3Kw9NhMQKeGD8NNbPOYIkcOVobRkdJ32Kw/viewform

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

MDFL Seeks Comment on Mediation Rules

The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida has put forth local rule amendments for comment including Mediation. The federal court proposal requires the attendance in-person unless otherwise ordered by the judge or agreed by the mediator — of lead counsel, the parties or a party’s surrogate satisfactory to the mediator, and any necessary insurance carrier representative. This default has been a feature of other courts' rules in recent times since Covid has mostly waned, though many have made the exception to be through stipulation or agreement by the parties, not the mediator. By way of example, the Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.700 now states that mediation must be conducted in person, unless the referral order directs, the state court or party moves, or the parties stipulate othewise and also permits a combination of in-person and use of commuication technology. The federal court seeks comment on this change and these can be submitted by by mailing them to Elizabeth Warren, Clerk of Court, Attention: Local Rules Comments, 401 W. Central Blvd, Ste. 2100, Orlando, FL 32801-0201 or submitting through a link here-- https://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/webforms/comment-proposed-amendments-local-rules All comments must be received by 5:00 p.m. EST on August 21, 2023. See the proposed amendments linked to public notice posted here-- https://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/announcements/public-notice-and-opportunity-comment-proposed-amendments-local-rules

3M CEO Required at Mediation

A Florida federal judge has ordered 3M CEO Michael Roman to attend mediation to resolve some 260,000 lawsuits alleging its military earplugs caused hearing loss. The judge wants the executive present so that he may "listen and engage directly with the mediators." Reportedly, mediation so far has been "encouraging," but requires 3M senior leadership to push ahead per the judge's order. Attendance of the CEO will ensure that 3M's board will have "firsthand knowledge of the current state of the negotiations" when evaluating any settlement offer. The lawsuits brought by veterans and members of the military allege that 3M's combat arms earplugs were defective. The company utilized bankruptcy of its subsidiary Aearo Technologies LLC, which manufactured the earplugs to try resolving the cases. 3M had opposed efforts to renew global mediation efforts in Florida federal court while Aearo's bankruptcy case is pending. 3M states it continues to believe that Aearo's bankruptcy provides a better option for resolving the earplug claims "more quickly, with more certainty and with more balanced recoveries among claimants." Aearo's bankruptcy strategy has been fiercely opposed by plaintiffs, who said that 3M was merely trying to escape litigation in Florida, following a series of unfavorable legal rulings and trial losses. See story here-- https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2023-05-22/3m-ceo-must-attend-mediation-in-earplug-litigation-judge-rules

New MDFL Local Rules Take Effect 2/1/21

After careful deliberation and based on the Lawyer Advisory Committee's report and the public comments, the Board of Judges recently approved revisions to the Middle District of Florida's Local Rules. The revised Local Rules become effective February 1, 2021. Stated goals for this revision are to: modernize and simplify; accommodate changes in national and local practice; eliminate overlap with federal rules and statutes; eliminate references to specific federal rules and statutes; address re-occurring complaints and issues; and accord with best practices. In regard to mediation, Chapter Four of the new rules specifies that:  To refer an action or claim to mediation, the judge must enter an order that: (a) designates the mediator or directs the parties to select a mediator and to notify the judge of the selection;(b ) establishes a mediation deadline; (c) requires a lawyer to confirm a mediation date agreeable to the mediator and the parties and to notify the judge of the date; (d) requires the attendance of lead counsel, the parties or a party’s surrogate satisfactory to the mediator, and any necessary insurance carrier representative;(e) notifies the parties that unexcused absence or departure from mediation is sanctionable; (f) requires the mediator to report within seven days after mediation the result of the mediation and whether all required persons attended; and (g) directs that the substance of the mediation is confidential and that no party, lawyer, or other participant is bound by, may record, or without the judge’s approval may disclose any event, including any statement confirming or denying a fact — except settlement — that occurs during the mediation. See more here- https://bit.ly/2YctX4u

Judge Vacates Emergency Order for Mediation Notes

This month, in an extremely rare move, a federal judge in Washington, D.C. first issued and later vacated an emergency order to preserve the notes of a mediation session in which an attorney allegedly threatened a female partner suing the firm for gender discrimination and pay inequity. Plaintiff, Jane Doe, alleges that another of her firm's attorneys illegally threatened retaliation against her during mediation, saying she was going to be terminated. Plaintiff desired the mediator’s notes in order to prove the exchange happened. The mediator was initially ordered to preserve notes and all other documents related to the session, with no indication whether material would ultimately be found relevant or admissible in the case. Such files are typically destroyed after mediation in order to preserve the confidentiality of the mediation process which allows the ability of parties to be open in session. Florida's Mediation Confidentiality and Privilege Act has very limited exceptions. Even in cases where mediation privilege is waived with consent of both parties, any records are produced in chambers in order to protect confidentiality. Allowing mediation notes to be used in lawsuits is quite disturbing and undermines the whole process, according to experts. JAMS, the ADR provider at this mediation, argued Doe should not have requested a preservation order for session notes because it already informed both parties that the notes would not be destroyed since they were subpoenaed. Doe acknowledged that JAMS said it would suspend its policy of destroying the records until issues surrounding the production of the documents in question are resolved, but asked the court to keep the preservation order in place. Plaintiff's motion was premised on an assertion that "a preservation order is necessary to preserve crucial evidence destined for immediate destruction" and that "absent a court order, it is virtually certain that this evidence will be lost." U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson found since that did not appear to be the case, there is no longer any "emergency" warranting relief, and vacated her previous order. See Jane Doe v. Proskauer Rose LLP, case number 1:17-cv-00901 http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov and more reported here-- http://bit.ly/2rUuMAq and http://bit.ly/2rV5RfV

Yosemite Names Settlement Stalls

An effort to settle a federal dispute between Yosemite National Park and its former concessions company, Delaware North, over trademarks has stalled before a costly and likely time-consuming court battle set next year. Despite mediation efforts between U.S. Justice Department attorneys and a government vendor, the sides reportedly resumed trial preparation. “'The parties do not believe that settlement is likely at this time,'” attorneys reported to the court, while adding that while they “'remain open to the possibility of mediation in this case...'" Myriad disagreements still separate the National Park Service from the concessions company. A new park concessions company takes over the lucrative contract this month. The departing company, a subsidiary of Delaware North, trademarked names of famous destinations like the Ahwahnee hotel (now known as Majestic Yosemite Hotel) and Curry Village cabins (now called Half Dome Village), during its tenure and now contends it must be paid for the intellectual property rights. Substantive differences over the lawsuit include the validity, dollar value and future of the new trademarks. The company’s sealed appraisal pegs the value of the trademarks at $44 million, while the government values the names at only $1.6 million. Of course, the U.S. Justice Department maintains a private company in attempting to monetize a property right it never possessed. Unless the judge summarily resolves the case, the core Yosemite trademark dispute won’t be decided until a U.S. Court of Federal Claims trial occurs in mid-to-late 2017, at the earliest. The parties previously advised Chief Judge Patricia E. Campbell-Smith that they were working on a framework for finding a settlement and apparently made substantial progress toward an agreement on a mediation plan, but did not explain exactly what caused them to step back from mediation. The government wants to allow the current Yosemite concessionaire, a subsidiary Aramark, to join the lawsuit as a third party. Delaware North opposes this move. Ultimately, the Justice Department argues, it could be the Aramark firm that’s liable for paying for any trademarks. See more here-- http://hrld.us/2bCOBnC and the court's order sealing the valuation report for trade secret reasons here-- https://ecf.cofc.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2015cv1034-34-0

Special Master Scolds in Water Wars

A 25-year water war between Florida and Georgia continues as Special master, Ralph Lancaster, previously appointed by the U.S. Supreme Court to help resolve the dispute, expressed dismay this month at the lack of progress toward settlement. Lancaster already urged attorneys for each state to settle the water wars case amongst themselves, rather than risk an unsatisfactory outcome for all involved. The federal lawsuit features Florida’s ailing oyster industry against Georgia’s right to use Chattahoochee River water across metro Atlanta. Florida states that Georgia’s overconsumption of water in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin, which includes Lake Lanier, is creating economic hardship, particularly on the oyster industry in the Florida Panhandle region's Apalachicola Bay. Georgia also seeks to maintain full use of the Flint River and its tributaries for farmers in southwest Georgia. The rivers join at the Florida border, becoming the Apalachicola River. Crucial to Florida's seafood folks is a fresh water-salt water balance for oysters to survive in the Apalachicola Bay. There's been no material progress on a global settlement since last year and the Special Master declined to extend this marathon by pushing pre-trial expert deadlines. He accused legal teams of ignoring earlier suggestions to pare down discovery evidence to basic, hardcore issues and instead plunging “even deeper into discovery of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of complex issues that will ultimately be left on the wayside, millions of pages of hard copies and hundreds of gigabytes of electronic files.” Since agreeing on a mediator, the states have only reported forming a basic mediation framework. Lancaster said in a teleconference of the parties, “Let me suggest...that if you had invested up to 10 percent of the effort and time and expense you have used in discovery on mediation, we would not be here spinning our wheels.” See more here-- bit.ly/1USyRNo

Court Approves NFL Concussion Settlement

After the first deal was rejected by the trial court just over a year ago, a second deal doing away with a $675 million cap on the fund from which injured former players would draw was reached. Reportedly, the National Football League (NFL) projects 6,000 of some 20,000 retired football players will suffer from dementia or Alzheimer's disease. The approved settlement could payout more than $1 billion. Plaintiffs lawyers not involved in negotiations on the second deal may still appeal over previously expressed concerns about the settlement terms. One attempt to appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit failed last fall, with that court declining to exercise jurisdiction on review of an order granting or denying class certification. The issue on appeal involved preliminary approval of the settlement and granting conditional certification of the class for settlement purposes. Even now that approval of the settlement is final, it could be appealed which would delay benefits to eligible players. Failure to compensate players with chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is the primary objection to the deal which only compensates for CTE if the player has died. The case faced significant legal hurdles at the start that could have landed the case in arbitration instead of federal court. At the outset, the district judge signaled a preference for settlement of the case, believing that the interests of all parties would be best served by a negotiated resolution. The settlement has been characterized as avoiding litigating thousands of complex individual claims over many years and providing immediate relief and support. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and team owners claim they wanted to "do the right thing" for former players with neurological conditions who believe their problems stem from on-field concussions. The lawsuit accused the league of hiding known risks of concussions for decades to return players to games and protect its image. See more here-- http://bit.ly/1x1uRxX and settlement info here-- http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-32420600 and http://bit.ly/1bAyhjS and www.nflconcussionsettlement.com

Guess Who’s Coming To Mediation - Next Thursday 2/19 at Noon!

Register for our free Upchurch Watson White & Max CLE webinar: "Guess Who’s Coming To Mediation" February 19. 2015 at noon. UWWM has applied for 1.0 hour General Credit (50 min) CLE from The Florida Bar. Program Speakers include distinguished UWWM mediators: Michelle Jernigan, Lawrence Kolin, and Dominic Brandy. At this unique online seminar, designed to increase or maintain the attorney’s professional competence and skills as a lawyer, you will be exposed to Florida rules under the topic of attendance and authority at mediation. Effective speakers in the areas of mediation certificates of authority and local rules, and use of technology for attendance will engage the audience and inspire conversation and questions on the related topics. The seminar is geared toward litigation practitioners whose clients utilize recognized processes in Florida’s courts to resolve cases, as well as mediators and arbitrators who may be eligible for CME. Michelle Jernigan will serve as our Moderator and review recent state rule changes for certifying attendance under Rule 1.720, FRCP. This rule redefines party attendance/authority and significantly, requires that the parties file a “certification of authority,” 10 days prior to appearing at a mediation conference, identifying the person or persons who will be attending the mediation conference as a party representative or as an insurance carrier representative, and confirming that those persons have the authority required by the amended rule. Lawrence Kolin will continue the discussion of appellate attendance rule, Rule 9.720, FRAP and local rules for court annexed mediation in the U.S. District Courts for the MDFL and NDFL and business court. The new language in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.720 was originally suggested by Kolin and designed to mirror what has been in effect for mediation of trial court level cases since 2011. Mediated settlement conferences pursuant to this rule are meant to be conducted when the participants actually engaged in the settlement negotiations have full authority to settle the case without further consultation. Local court rules for the Middle and Northern Districts of Florida will also be covered. Finally, Dominic Brandy will outline of new rule in U.S. District Court for SDFL and requirement for court approval, if variations are required. Unless excused in writing by the presiding Judge, all parties and required claims professionals (e.g., insurance adjusters) shall be physically present at the SDFL mediation conference (i.e., in person if the party is a natural person or by personal attendance of a corporate representative if the party is an entity) with full authority to negotiate a settlement. The mediator shall report non-attendance to the Court. Failure to comply with the attendance or settlement authority requirements may subject a party to sanctions by the Court. A Question & Answer session will follow the webinar presentation. Information on panelists at http://www.uww-adr.com/webinar/guess-whos-coming-to-mediation and link to your registration here--https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/628144760073036802 so sign-up now!

Register for Guess Who’s Coming To Mediation

Join us next month for our next Upchurch Watson White & Max Webinar: "Guess Who’s Coming To Mediation?" February 19. 2015 at noon. UWWM has applied for 1.0 hour General Credit (50 min) CLE from The Florida Bar. Program Speakers include distinguished UWWM mediators: Michelle Jernigan, Lawrence Kolin, and Dominic Brandy. At this unique online seminar, designed to increase or maintain the attorney’s professional competence and skills as a lawyer, you will be exposed to wide ranging rules under the topic of attendance and authority at mediation. Effective speakers in the areas of mediation certificates of authority and local rules, and use of technology for attendance will engage the audience and inspire conversation and questions on the related topics. The seminar is geared toward litigation practitioners whose clients utilize recognized processes in Florida’s courts to resolve cases, as well as mediators and arbitrators who may be eligible for CME. Michelle Jernigan will serve as our Moderator and review recent state rule changes for certifying attendance under Rule 1.720, FRCP. This rule redefines party attendance/authority and significantly, requires that the parties file a “certification of authority,” 10 days prior to appearing at a mediation conference, identifying the person or persons who will be attending the mediation conference as a party representative or as an insurance carrier representative, and confirming that those persons have the authority required by the amended rule. Lawrence Kolin will continue the discussion of appellate attendance rule, Rule 9.720, FRAP and local rules for court annexed mediation in the U.S. District Courts for the MDFL and NDFL. The new language in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.720 was originally suggested by Kolin and designed to mirror what has been in effect for mediation of trial court level cases since 2011. Mediated settlement conferences pursuant to this rule are meant to be conducted when the participants actually engaged in the settlement negotiations have full authority to settle the case without further consultation. Local court rules for the Middle and Northern Districts of Florida will also be covered. Finally, Dominic Brandy will outline of new rule in U.S. District Court for SDFL and requirement for court approval, if variations are required. Unless excused in writing by the presiding Judge, all parties and required claims professionals (e.g., insurance adjusters) shall be physically present at the SDFL mediation conference (i.e., in person if the party is a natural person or by personal attendance of a corporate representative if the party is an entity) with full authority to negotiate a settlement. The mediator shall report non-attendance to the Court. Failure to comply with the attendance or settlement authority requirements may subject a party to sanctions by the Court. A Question & Answer session will follow the webinar presentation. Information on panelists at www.uww-adr.com and link to your seat here-- https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/628144760073036802 so register now!

Tech Firms Settle Recruiting Suit on Eve of Trial

Major technology companies agreed yesterday to settle a class-action lawsuit in which 64,000 employees accused them of conspiring not to recruit each other's workers, suppressing compensation. Terms of the settlement involving Apple, Google, Intel, and Adobe weren't immediately released, but the case reportedly settled for about $325 million. During pretrial proceedings, emails from top executives including Steve Jobs, Sergey Brin and Eric Schmidt surfaced, showing the executives conferred on hiring plans, sometimes through intermediaries. Defendants filed motions seeking to exclude evidence that made Jobs appear as a bully, which was apparently validated in Brin's deposition. Avoiding executives appearing on the witness stand made a settlement attractive. Intel stated it was settling to avoid the risks of litigation, but denied violating any laws or obligations. Adobe elected to settle this matter in order to avoid the uncertainties, cost and distraction of litigation. Apple and Google declined comment. Employees of the companies had been seeking $3 billion in damages. Under antitrust rules, that could have been tripled to $9 billion. The settlement follows settlements reached last year with Lucasfilm, Pixar and Intuit for a combined $20 million. The civil case followed a 2010 Justice Department case on the same matter. Trial was set to begin May 27th before U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, Calif. The case alleged an inner circle of Silicon Valley executives communicated during a period when the interoperability of companies' products was often discussed. Emails between the executives embarrassed executives and their companies. E-discovery played a role in the deal, as Schmidt had emailed about only conferring on agreements not to recruit from other companies verbally, so as not to create a paper trail which could later be sued upon. See story here-- http://on.wsj.com/1mEOu7N

Airline Antitrust Mediation

The U.S. Justice Department agreed to go to mediation along with American Airlines and US Airways to try and resolve the government’s lawsuit seeking to block the proposed merger of the two airlines. The case is headed to trial this month in federal court. The parties agreed to a mediator “suggested by the court,” which is a bit unusual. The Justice Department contends the planned merger would create the world’s largest airline, thereby reducing competition and leading to higher fares. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who presided over the Microsoft antitrust case, is overseeing the litigation and has said in prior orders that she encourages the use of alternative dispute resolution. Though American has been in bankruptcy for two years, the parent company AMR was set to exit court protection by merging with US Airways when the federal government and a group of states sued to block the deal. If the U.S. prevails in stopping the merger, it has been reported that re-organization will have to start anew, causing disruption among creditors. See more at http://bit.ly/1axsR2f and in case 13-cv-01236 U.S. v. US Airways Group, Inc., U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

NFL Helmet Maker Mediation

Last month, before the start of the NFL regular season, thousands of former players settled with the National Football League over concussion-related suits for $765 million. However, the apparent amicable resolution to their case doesn’t mean litigation is over. NFL helmet manufacturer Riddell and former players are continuing talks because the deal doesn’t include Riddell. While those negotiations remain confidential by order of the federal judge to "refrain from publicly discussing the mediation process or disclosing any discussions they may have as part of that process,” the proposed settlement between the NFL and some 4,500 former players awaits court approval and a determination on fees. In a prior order, the presiding judge, Hon. Anita Brody, expressed her belief that "the interests of all parties would be best served by a negotiated resolution of this case. The settlement holds the prospect of avoiding lengthy, expensive and uncertain litigation, and of enhancing the game of football.” Riddell may remain exposed following a state jury verdict this year in Colorado, determining that Riddell failed to adequately warn a former football player about the dangers of concussions, resulting in a $3.1 million damages. In this federal matter, Riddell had argued their case should be heard separately from the case against the NFL, but a motion to sever was never granted before ordering the Riddell defendants into the global mediation. See articles here-- http://bit.ly/1fXmCX8 and http://bit.ly/15hvyFk

Motor City Mediation?

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Steven Rhodes, who is overseeing the largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history, has proposed appointing a federal district judge as mediator to negotiate the most difficult disputes in trying to resolve some $18 billion in Detroit's bond and pension obligations. Proposed restructuring of obligations sparked outrage from city retirees whose pensions and benefits could be cut drastically. Judge Rhodes tapped Hon. Gerald Rosen, Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, to oversee any confidential mediation or another mediator of Judge Rosen's choosing. That way, Judge Rosen can mediate disputes or appoint other mediators, with the costs shared by the negotiating parties. Details about the mediation talks would not be disclosed, but any agreements would be made public. Next month, Judge Rhodes will consider deadlines for the city to file its formal plan for repaying its obligations and for rejecting collective bargaining agreements. Bankruptcy judges often utilize mediators as a way to bring together parties in private who might find it difficult to reach a consensus through a more open court process. Judge Rhodes also proposed an order appointing an examiner to review fees to be paid by Detroit. See stories here: http://reut.rs/1aMUiWH and http://usat.ly/15QCKWE

Concussion case by NFL players heads to Mediation

A federal case brought by former National Football League players that accuses the league of hiding dangers of concussions has been ordered to mediation. A pending motion to dismiss the case will be taken under advisement until September, giving the mediator time to bring the sides closer together. United States District Court Judge Anita Brody of Pennsylvania, ordered a retired federal judge to serve as mediator in the case. Players have charged that the league concealed for decades what it knew about the long-term effects of repeated hits to the head. The NFL maintains it issued warnings consistent with medical research available at the time. Additionally, the league contends player safety is governed by collective bargaining agreements. Each side has made strong arguments, but there is incentive to settle early. Though the owners have greater ability to absorb legal fees, discovery over a period of years could unearth evidence that might hurt the league’s reputation. Likewise, retired players, many of whom have significant health concerns, may prefer to settle sooner for less. Without a ruling, the scope of the case remains wide, involving players from decades ago, as well as those who retired recently. “Presumably, the [mediator] is experienced and he can give both sides an appraisal of the case from the perspective of someone who’s sat on the bench,” said Matthew Mitten, director of Marquette University's National Sports Law Institute. “It doesn’t hurt to take a step back and take a reality check.” See full article here-- http://nyti.ms/1bkQYmL

Mass. Airport Mediation over Secret Service Damage

Marlboro Airport in Massachusetts is suing the United States Secret Service for just under $700,000 in property damage allegedly caused by an April Fool’s Day visit a couple of years ago by the President. The owners of the public facility and the government have agreed to sit down and will try to work things out in order to avoid a trial set for the end of this summer. U.S. District Court Judge Timothy S. Hillman of Worcester sent the case to mediation. The lawsuit claims Marine helicopters and an armored convoy, including a twenty ton fire-suppression truck and other security vehicles, tore up the 1,682-foot runway and grass apron. This happened during the Commander-in-Chief’s April 1, 2010 surprise visit to the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency bunker in Framingham, around the time of record rainfall and flooding there. According to court filings, the Massachusetts Department of Transportation Aeronautics Division reported finding widespread damage to Marlboro Airport it attributed to the visit. The report cites moderate to serious cracks and ruts along the entire length of the runway with pavement breakup, which “was further damaged by the heavy vehicles and helicopters of the presidential security details.” See stories here- http://bit.ly/1a6CLGH and http://bo.st/9foi9Y

Memorabilia Mediation

NBA Los Angeles Laker Kobe Bryant's mom claims her son lied to block her planned sale of his memorabilia. Bryant's father, a former basketball player who went by nickname "Jellybean," and grandmother are siding with Bryant's mother, saying Kobe Bryant had declined to take the collectibles from his parents' home. Bryant's sister supports him, suggesting their mother repeatedly discussed how to make money from the superstar's belongings. Opposing lawsuits have erupted over an auction of collectibles from Kobe Bryant's past at a New Jersey auction house. Items to be sold next month include jerseys, trophies and rings from his high school and professional career. Kobe Bryant denies giving his stuff to his mom and wants the items for his children. Pamela Bryant contends that the collectibles have been in her possession for at least 15 years and that she paid some $90,000 to store the items. After Kobe Bryant sent a cease-and-desist, the auction house sued for court approval. The firm noted that it has paid a $450,000 advance to Bryant's mother, who used it to buy a house in Las Vegas. Kobe Bryant filed his own lawsuit May 7 in California, seeking to block the sale. Now a federal judge has directed mediation before a possible June trial. U.S. District Judge Renee Marie Bumb set a mediation session for May 17 in New Jersey, for the parties to try and settle during an in-person conference in chambers. Last week, California U.S. District Judge Andrew Guilford issued an order in federal court, that blocks Goldin Auctions from selling or transferring the jerseys, rings, and other sports memorabilia that Bryant says belong to him. Bryant originally sued the auctioneer in Orange County, California state court four days after the auctioneer sued the Laker in New Jersey federal court. Goldin Auctions removed to federal court, prompting a temporary restraining order. See cases: Bryant v. Goldin Auctions, 13-cv-727, U.S. District Court, Central District of California (Santa Ana); and Goldin Auctions LLC v. Bryant, 0013-cv-02816, U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey (Camden). See stories-- http://usat.ly/16aIQFr and http://bloom.bg/14liEU0

Spider-Man musical settles, avoiding the sticky web of trial

Producers of the musical “Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark” and its former director, Julie Taymor, settled a lawsuit over copyright claims, artistic credit and profits for the most expensive show ever on Broadway. Taymor originally filed suit on copyright grounds after being fired, claiming producers made money from her ideas and script and owed her more than $1 million. The producers countersued, saying they fired her for breach of contract. U2's Bono and the Edge, and Marvel Entertainment (licensor for the Spider-Man brand), were also involved. Taymor had approval of future tours and versions of scripts that ended with the deal, freeing future transformation of the show for venues like Las Vegas. Despite confidentiality, reported sources with knowledge of the settlement said the terms included reductions in royalties due to the high operating cost, with financial concessions improving the show’s prospects for a continuing run and to recoup the $75M production. Spider-Man has become one of the top-grossing musicals on Broadway, as well as a fan favorite-- despite negative reviews. Trial was set to begin next month in Manhattan federal court. A highly publicized trial would serve no one’s interests, according to several associates of Taymor and the producers. Tours and new productions are planned and trial apparently threatened to complicate those efforts. The fate of a documentary about the creation of the musical remains unclear. See news item here- http://nyti.ms/111rQvG

Diamonds are Forever; What's in a slogan?

U.S. District Court Judge John Adams of Ohio ordered Sterling Jewelers Inc. and Zale Corporation into mediation in a diamond advertising lawsuit. Sterling, a unit of Signet, sued Zale last fall, alleging Zale's advertisements for the Celebration Fire diamond as "the most brilliant diamond in the world" were false and misleading. Sterling, based in Akron, said its tests found that its own diamonds are as glittery as those sold in Zales. In the lawsuit, Sterling demanded that Zale's advertisements be pulled. However, multimillion-dollar ads remained in place throughout the winter holiday shopping season and the court denied Sterling's request to pull them. At a preliminary injunction hearing earlier this year, the judge said that Sterling had not shown that it would suffer financially, even if it could prove that Zale's boast of the most brilliant polished diamond in the world was false. In accordance with the referral to mediate, both parties have until April 10th to review, confer and appoint court approved federal mediators and must come to agreement by May 2nd. Sometimes a mediation following a TRO, which is like a mini-trial, is more productive, as the parties have seen a preview of the court's reaction to claims and defenses and are ready for a self-determined solution. See stories here-- http://bit.ly/13QA3b1 and http://bit.ly/11WJgJP and http://on.wsj.com/11VSx7J