05/15/2026
A note about MEDIATOR SELECTION for counsel facing difficult, high-stakes disputes.
Mediation in civil litigation has evolved dramatically over the past 30 years. Yet too often, mediator selection still relies on shorthand: “Joe is good.” or “We need a retired judge for this one.”
That is not enough.
Lawyers invest serious time in attending CLE seminars learning how to select arbitrators and jurors. But if roughly 95% of cases resolve before trial, then mediator selection deserves the same level of diligence.
I was recently retained for a complex commercial mediation with a mid-eight-figure demand. None of the lawyers had worked with me before - I came recommended by a colleague they trusted, but wisely, both lead counsel still scheduled separate 30-minute Zoom interviews with me before selecting me to mediate it with them.
They asked about my approach. They wanted to know whether I understood the legal, business, and client dynamics. They described the global brand issues, Dutch law that applied, ICC arbitration, valuation disputes, franchise dynamics, private equity ownership, and the personal challenges affecting the decision-makers.
Only after that thorough process did they agree to use me. And after that, they did so with confidence, and put it into my hands to manage.
Together, we designed a two-day mediation in London, structured around who needed to be in the room, when people were flying in and how rested they would be, and what submissions would best prepare the process.
The case required more than legal experience. It required someone who could navigate foreign law issues, valuation gaps, business realities, emotional dynamics, and a lot of high stakes negotiation strategy (the gap began at $60,000,000 and $3,800,000). It also required someone with the stamina to mediate 12 hours a day for two long days, and keep everyone engaged.
No offers were exchanged for two days. At my urging for this case, we negotiated only through conditional brackets until the matter resolved. This allowed everyone to save face throughout the entire process, which this case needed.
At the end, opposing counsel hugged each other (and me!). The respondent’s representative showed real empathy for the claimant, even though she had been the one charged with terminating the contracts. The claimant’s aging patriarch left with his dignity restored.
That is what the right mediator can help make possible.
Every case requires a different mediator with unique skills. But complex cases require more than status, résumé lines, or prior titles. They require the right fit, the right skills, and the right experience.
In 2026, it is time for counsel to elevate their mediator due diligence. Your clients deserve more. Matching the right mediator to your case and clients is not just good practice, dare I say, it is counsel’s obligation.