Posted by
ADR at Tulane
on
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Would Face-to-Face Have Settled a Hip Hop Facedown?
From Conflict Prevention and Resolution, 09/02/2010
"...Knight, the former Death Row Records CEO, alleged that West should be responsible for damages he sustained at a party West threw at Miami’s
Shore Club, in the city’s South Beach section, in 2005.
According to the
New York Post, Knight alleges that he was shot and robbed at the party. He is seeking more than $1 million in damages to cover, among other things, $200,000 in medical bills and $135,000 for a diamond earring lost in the aftermath. Knight also claims that both West and the Shore Club failed to provide adequate security.
The parties have had two opportunities to settle the case. According to a
blog on the Miami
New Times’ website, the first attempt occurred in June, which resulted in West, and his attorney, walking out.
This set of facts raises several important questions:
Does being face-to-face improve the quality and result of mediation?
It is likely that face-to-face mediation will improve the quality of, and garner better results in, the mediation process. This is because one of the many benefits of mediation is the opportunity to meet your adversary on a (relatively) even keel outside of the adversarial model. By calling in, there is potential for undermining the spirit of the session.
True, face-to-face didn’t work the first time around in June. But first mediation sessions also often are known to focus on laying the groundwork for a settlement later.
Even if they didn’t pick up from where they left off, the parties would have had a better chance for success if they had met face to face. Without West’s attendance, the chances of a symbolic handshake that precedes a more-concrete deal was not likely. ...."
Read the full article here.
