• Fair Housing and Employment Act. Disability discrimination and failure to accommodate in violation of the Fair Housing and Employment Act (FEHA), Cal. Gov’t. Code § 12940(m) et seq.). Failure to engage in the interactive process in violation of FEHA, Cal Gov’t. Code § 12940(n) et seq. Intentional infliction of emotional distress. Amount in controversy $185,000.  Early Settlement Neutral, Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County.

• Fair Labor Standards. Claims of violation of the California Labor Code § 510, violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq.), failure to provide meal and rest periods in violation of California Labor Code § 226.7, waiting time penalties under the California Labor Code § 203, and violation of California Business and Professions Code § 17203. Sole Mediator, United States District Court for the Northern District of California ADR Program. 

• Breach of contract/warranty. Claims arising out of termination of a commercial restaurant lease, including responsibility of damage to the premises, insurance coverage, subrogation rights, collateral source rule, landlord and tenant responsibility for maintenance and repair under the terms of the lease, non-payment of rent and common area fees, and vandalism. Amount in controversy $75,000. Sole Mediator, Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County.

• Medical Malpractice. Action for wrongful death of an infant from hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy due to perinatal cardiac arrest, metabolic acidosis and pulmonary hemorrhage. Claims of negligent obstetrical medical care provided by the attending obstetrician and the hospital nursing and neonatal staff. Issues of medical causation and the nature and extent of disability arising out of a fetal maternal hemorrhage, the standard of care and the MICRA cap. Amount of in controversy in excess of $750,000. Settlement Judge Pro Tem, Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County.

• Declaration of Intellectual Property Rights; Breach of Contract. Claims involve the intellectual property rights arising out of development of software technology in a start up venture, founders shares, patent, trade secret and copyright ownership and rights of use, misappropriation, fraud, violation of fiduciary duty, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and interference with prospective business advantage.  Early Settlement Neutral, Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County.

• Breach of Construction Contract.  Claims involve breach of an oral contract between the general contractor and its subcontractor, set-off for defective work, and the availability of attorneys fees. Settlement Judge Pro Tem, Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County.  

• Breach of Contract. Claims involve indemnification, and fraud arising out of the purchase and sale of a business. Settlement Judge Pro Tem, Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County. 

• Law Firm Shareholder Suit. Petition for Writ of Mandate to inspect accounting books and records of law corporation. Settlement Judge Pro Tem, Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County.

• Patent Infringement. Claims involve validity, infringement, and damages of no less than a reasonable royalty. Mediator, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ADR Program.  

• Trademark and Unfair Competition. Claims involve trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C. § 1114; false designation of origin under 15 U.S.C. § 117(a)(3); common law trademark infringement; state law unfair competition: fraudulent business practices under Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §17200 et seq., misrepresentation under Cal. Civil Code §1770)(a)(2) & (3), and false advertising under Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §17500; waiver, estoppel, laches, acquiescence, and unclean hands; fraudulent use of a federal trademark before obtaining registration, fraud on the patent and Trademark Office, cancellation of the mark for impermissible material alteration of the drawing of the mark; attorneys fees, costs and expenses, injunctive relief. Early Neutral Evaluator, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ADR Program.

• Airplane Accident; Premises Liability. Claims of personal injury arising out of a slip and fall while disembarking from an international flight. Issues of pre-existing condition, medical causation and the nature and extent of disability; liability of the international carrier for an “accident” under the Montreal Convention, Article 17; Special Drawing Rights limitation of liability under the Montreal Convention, Article 21; public entity liability under California Government Code § 815; Medicare/Medi-Cal recoupment, 42 CFR § 411.37. Early Neutral Evaluator, United States District Court for the Northern District of California ADR Program. 

• Unlawful Detainer. Claims for nonpayment of rent under a commercial lease. Issues involved interpretation of the lease terms regarding the landlord and tenant responsibilities to repair and maintain the premises and to replace the roof, responsibility for a collapsed roof, tenant’s removal of fixtures at the lease termination, insurance coverage, solvency and the collectability of any judgment. Amount in controversy $55,000. Early Settlement Neutral, Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County.

• Personal Injury. Tort action for personal injuries arising out of a work-related accident, where a truck ran over the mechanic’s legs, fracturing his ankle. Issues included the extent of permanent impairment, future wage loss, mitigation of damages, contributory negligence, loaned employee, volunteer, and workers’ compensation lien. Amount in controversy more than $1,000,000. Settlement Judge Pro Tem, Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County.

• Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance Act (FEGLIA).  Claim for recovery of insurance benefits paid pursuant to a beneficiary designation executed prior to decedent’s death but submitted to the decedent’s employer after his death, with issues of whether the FEGLIA statutes were violated, conversion, unjust enrichment, decedent’s intent, entitlement to counsel fees, and defendant’s inability to pay any judgment that might result. Amount in controversy $ 84,000. Mediator, United States District Court for the Northern District of California ADR Program.

 

Mediation is an informal, confidential process in which a neutral party (the mediator) assists the parties in understanding their own interests, the interests of the other parties, and the practical and legal realities they all face. The mediator then helps the parties to explore options and arrive at a mutually acceptable resolution of the dispute. The mediator does not decide the dispute. The parties do.

Mediation may be appropriate when:

• The parties want a non-adversary procedure
• The parties have a continuing business or personal relationship
• Communication problems are interfering with a resolution
• There is an emotional element involved
• The parties are interested in an injunction, consent decree, or other form of equitable relief
• The law does not provide an appropriate remedy
• The parties want privacy

Remedies provided by a court judgment are limited by the applicable law. The result is public. Through mediation, the parties may obtain the relief they most desire-an apology, letter of reference, a job, a licensing deal, a buy-out, a nondisclosure agreement- a private resolution that they can live with, which may not be available from the court.

Suzanne K. Nusbaum blends her judicial experience with advanced mediation training from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to provide non-directive, party-driven mediation. She believes that mediation is not about "arm twisting" or other coercive settlement techniques, but rather about empowering and assisting the parties to resolve the dispute in a way that satisfies their own needs, interests, beliefs, and goals.Contact us to schedule a mediation session.
 

 

Arbitration is a process in which the neutral (the arbitrator) decides the dispute after hearing the evidence and arguments of the parties. The parties can agree to binding or non-binding arbitration. Binding arbitration is designed to give the parties a resolution of their dispute when they cannot agree by themselves or with a mediator. If the arbitration is non-binding, any party can reject the arbitrator's decision and request a trial.

Arbitration may be appropriate when:

• The action is for personal injury, property damage, or breach of contract
• Only monetary damages are sought
• Witness testimony, under oath, is desired
• An advisory opinion is sought and the facts are disputed (if a non-binding arbitration)

The California Superior Court provides judicial arbitration services. See Santa Clara County Superior Court Santa Clara County Superior Court local rule 4.

The parties may also agree to submit their dispute to Private Arbitration administered by an ADR provider such as the WIPO (the World Intellectual Property Organization). WIPO requires the arbitrator to be independent and faithfully apply the law to facts impartially found. Its rules allow injunctive relief, as well as a monetary award. You may satisfy your court ADR requirement by requesting WIPO to appoint Suzanne K. Nusbaum as your private arbitrator.

Suzanne K. Nusbaum is a seasoned arbitrator with more than thirty years of litigation and judicial experience. Contact us.

 

 

Neutral evaluation is an informal process in which a neutral party (the evaluator) reviews the case with counsel and gives a non-binding assessment of the strengths and weaknesses on each side and the likely outcome. The neutral can help parties to identify issues, prepare stipulations, and draft discovery plans. The parties may use the neutral's evaluation to discuss settlement.

Neutral evaluation may be appropriate when:

• The parties are far apart in their view of the law or value of the case
• The case involves a technical issue in which the evaluator has expertise
• Case planning assistance would be helpful and would save legal fees and costs
• The parties are interested in an injunction, consent decree, or other form of equitable relief

Suzanne K. Nusbaum serves on the neutral evaluation panels of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California and the California Superior Court, Santa Clara County. She was a respected jurist, nominated, and reappointed to adjudicatory positions in two states, and has significant case management expertise gained from her years of judicial service. Contact us.  

Special master and referee is a neutral party who may be appointed by the court to obtain information or to make specific fact findings that may lead to resolution of a dispute.

Special masters and referees can be particularly effective in complex cases with a number of parties.

Suzanne K. Nusbaum serves on the Special Master panel of the California Superior Court, Santa Clara County.From her many years as an administrative law judge and as a workers' compensation commissioner, she has gained considerable experience in managing multi-party litigation with insurance coverage or apportionment issues.  Contact us.