• Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators (Aug. 2005)
• Proposed Addition to the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct (Comments on Settlement Responsibilities) (Feb. 2005)
• Resolution on Good Faith (2004)
• Code of Ethics for Commercial Arbitrators (2003)
• E-Commerce and ADR (2002)
• ABA Section of Dispute Resolution's Resolution on Mediation and the Unauthorized Practice of Law (Feb 2002)
• ADR Ethics ("Ethics 2000 Commission") (Feb 2002)
• Uniform Mediation Act Update (Feb 2002)
• Revised Uniform Arbitration Act (2001)
• Standards for the Establishment and Operation of Ombuds Offices (2001)
• Family Mediation Standards (Aug. 2000)
• Resolution Calling for the Inclusion of People from Multiple Professions in Court-Connected Mediation Programs (1999)

The views expressed herein, unless indicated otherwise, have not yet been approved by the ABA House of Delegates or the Board of Governors of the American Bar Association and accordingly should not be construed as representing the policy of the American Bar Association.

Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators
The Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators were prepared from 1992 through 1994 by a joint committee composed of two delegates from each of three entities: the American Arbitration Association ("AAA"), the American Bar Association ("ABA") Section of Dispute Resolution, and the Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution ("SPIDR") (which has since merged with two other organizations to form the Association for Conflict Resolution). The Model Standards were then approved by the AAA, the ABA Section of Litigation and Section of Dispute Resolution, and SPIDR. The Standards were adopted by at least nine states in total or with slight variations. Additionally, many educational texts reference the Standards in their discussions of ethical norms for mediators.

In 2002, a new Joint Committee composed in the same way, but with a new group of individuals, began work on the Revised Standards. Substantial efforts were made throughout the course of a two-and-a-half-year drafting process -- including a website; wide-ranging publication; four public forums in New York, California, Florida, and Texas; and other means -- to elicit input from the dispute resolution community. Documents produced by the Joint Committee are available on the Ohio State Moritz College of Law website by clicking on "Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators" in the right-hand column.

By the end of April 2005, the Revised Standards had been approved by the three drafting entities, as well as the Litigation Section of the ABA. They were also endorsed by the ABA Labor and Employment Section. The Revised Standards have been jointly submitted by the Dispute Resolution and Litigation Sections to the ABA House of Delegates for consideration at the August 2005 ABA Annual Meeting.

On August 9, 2005, the American Bar Association House of Delegates approved the revised version of the Model Standards of Conduct for Mediators.
See the Comparison of 1994 and 2005 Versions.

Correction to the Previously Published Model Standards of Conduct

PROPOSED ADDITION TO THE ABA MODEL CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT (Comments on Settlement Responsibilities)

ABA Section of Dispute Resolution, February 4, 2005 (Approved by the Section of Dispute Resolution Council on February 3, 2005).

Resolution on Good Faith Requirements
The ABA Section of Dispute Resolution ("Section") has noted the wide range of views expressed by scholars, mediators, judges, and regulators concerning the question of whether courts should have the authority to sanction participants in mediation for bad-faith conduct in court-mandated mediation programs. The Section believes that both the public interest, court systems, and the practice of mediation would benefit from a re-examination and perhaps revision of "good faith" statutes and rules to preserve the core values of the mediation process, namely, party self-determination, mediator impartiality, and mediation confidentiality. Representatives of the Section reviewed state and federal statutes and rules on "good faith" and law review articles discussing the subject of good faith participation in mediation then drafted a policy to address the emerging issues. For a copy of the policy, please click here.

The following has been approved by the American Bar Association House of Delegates.

Code of Ethics for Commercial Arbitrators
The Section of Dispute Resolution is working with other Sections of the ABA to revise the Code of Ethics for Arbitrators in Commercial Disputes. Since its promulgation by the ABA and the American Arbitration Association in 1977, the Code of Ethics for Arbitrators in Commercial Disputes has been the definitive statement of ethical principles for American Arbitrators. Recognizing that the 1977 Code had become unresponsive to current concerns and provided inadequate guidance in numerous respects the Arbitration Committee of the Dispute Resolution Section convened a committee including representatives of the Ethics Committee, AAA and CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution. The committee drafted a revised code. An ABA task force consisting of representatives from the Section of Dispute Resolution, as well as the Section of International Law and Practice, the Senior lawyers Division, the Torts and Insurance Practice Section, and the Litigation Section convened and has issued the 2003 revised code. For a copy of the revised code click here.

E-Commerce and ADR
Five sections of the American Bar Association, have jointly created the ABA Task Force on E-Commerce and ADR and an accompanying Advisory Committee to propose consensus-based protocols, workable guidelines and standards that can be implemented by parties to on-line transactions and by online dispute resolution providers. The Task Force is focusing on the challenges raised by multi-jurisdictional business to business ("B2B") and business to consumer ("B2C") transactions. The five sections participating in this effort are the Section of Dispute Resolution, the Section of Business Law, the Section of Litigation, the International Law and Practice Section, and the Intellectual Property Law Section. See Final Report and Recommended Best Practices.

See the Guide for Consumers
See the Draft Guide for Merchants

ABA Section of Dispute Resolution's Resolution on Mediation and the Unauthorized Practice of Law
The ABA Section of Dispute Resolution has noted the wide range of views expressed by scholars, mediators, and regulators concerning the question of whether mediation constitutes the practice of law. The Section believes that both the public interest and the practice of mediation would benefit from greater clarity with respect to this issue in the statutes and regulations governing the unauthorized practice of law (“UPL”). The Section believes that such statutes and regulations should be interpreted and applied in such a manner as to permit all individuals, regardless of whether they are lawyers, to serve as mediators. In order to encourage such interpretations, the Section has adopted a Resolution on Mediation and the Unauthorized Practice of Law. The Resolution contains commentary comparing the Resolution with particular state guidelines and with existing and emerging ethical guidelines for mediators. See the Resolution at http://www.dispute/resolution2002.pdf (.pdf).

ADR Ethics ("Ethics 2000 Commission")
The ABA House of Delegate has passed at the mid-year meeting (Feb. 2002) a substantial group of amendments to the Model Rules of Professional Responsibility, which are based upon recommendations of the Ethics 2000 Commission, and which relate in part to ADR Ethics. A copy of these rules are available at http://www.abanet.org/cpr/. The new ABA rules cover four topics of special interest to neutrals and advocates who practice in ADR proceedings.

• Recognition of neutral role for lawyers. Rule 2.4.
• Conflicts of interest for lawyer-neutrals. Rule 1.12.
• Duty of Candor in mediations and arbitrations. Rules 3.3, 4.1.
• Duty on the part of lawyers to advise clients of ADR options in resolving disputes. Rule 2.1, Comment 5.

Uniform Mediation Act Update
The Uniform Mediation Act was drafted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) and the ABA Section of Dispute Resolution (ABA DR). This is the first time in its 115 year history that NCCUSL has worked jointly with another drafting group and the drafting committees are crafting proposed legislation that each state may adopt to bring clarity and uniformity to the mediation process. The key provisions of the Act provide an evidentiary privilege to protect the confidentiality of mediation communications. The Act is crafted as a minimum level of protection in those states that have none and is not meant to replace stronger confidentiality protections already on the books. The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws approved the Act in August 2001. The American Bar Association's House of Delegates approved the Act in February 2002. For more information about the Uniform Mediation Act, visit http://www.pon.harvard.edu/guests/uma/.

Revised Uniform Arbitration Act
The Revised Uniform Arbitration Act updates the original Uniform Arbitration Act to reflect the modern practice of arbitration and changes in the law. These issues include who decides the arbitrability of a dispute, arbitrator disclosures, what remedies an arbitrator can award, and how parties initiate an arbitration. The National Council of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws approved and recommended the RUAA for enactment at its meeting in August, 2000. The Revised Uniform Arbitration Act was approved by the ABA House of Delegates in February 2001. For more information about the RUAA, visit http://www.law.upenn.edu/bll/ulc/uarba/arb1031.htm

Standards for the Establishment and Operation of Ombuds Offices
On August 7, 2001 the American Bar Association House of Delegates approved standards for the establishment of ombuds offices in the public and private sector. The approval by the House of Delegates makes the ombuds standards official policy of the ABA. The ombuds standards were drafted by members of the Ombuds Committees of the ABA Sections of Dispute Resolution and Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice led by Ellen Waxman, Sharan Levine and Phil Harter. The standards identify three core characteristics of an ombuds office: impartiality, independence and confidentiality. The standards also describe three different types of ombuds: classical ombuds, organizational ombuds and advocate ombuds. See the final recommendation, standards and report.

Family Mediation Standards
The Model Standards of Practice for Family and Divorce Mediation are the product of a multi-year collaborative effort to define the role of family mediation in the dispute resolution system. The Model Standards unify pre-existing codes and guidelines promulgated by a variety of organizations, courts, and legislatures in the past 20 years and address particular issues and problems in family mediation practice. The standards have three primary functions: to guide the conduct of family mediators; to inform the mediation participants about the process; and to promote public confidence in mediation as a process for resolving family disputes For more information, click here.

Resolution Calling for the Inclusion of People from Multiple Professions in Court-Connected Mediation Programs
"THE SECTION OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION HAS NOTED THAT MANY COURT CONNECTED ADR PROGRAMS AND OTHER DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROGRAMS HAVE RESTRICTED PARTICIPATION TO NEUTRALS WHO ARE LAWYERS. THE SECTION BELIEVES THAT THE ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROGRAMS SHOULD PERMIT ALL INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE THE APPROPRIATE TRAINING AND QUALIFICATIONS TO SERVE AS NEUTRALS, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY ARE LAWYERS." (ADOPTED 4/28/99)

New Resources