Case Title: In Re: Amendments to the Florida Rules for Certified and Court-Appointed Mediators

Citation: 

Docket Number: SC15-875

State: florida

Court: Florida Supreme Court

Date: 2016-10-27T00:00:00Z

Document:
Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC15-875 
____________ 
 
 
IN RE:  AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA RULES FOR CERTIFIED 
AND COURT-APPOINTED MEDIATORS. 
 
[October 27, 2016] 
 
PER CURIAM. 
 
This matter is before the Court for consideration of proposed amendments to 
the Florida Rules for Certified and Court-Appointed Mediators (Mediator Rules).  
We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const.; § 44.106, Fla. Stat. (2016). 
BACKGROUND 
 
The Supreme Court Committee on Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules and 
Policy (Committee) has filed a petition to amend the Mediator Rules.  The petition 
represents several years of work by the Committee and the Dispute Resolution 
Center to redraft Part III (Discipline) of the Mediator Rules.  The Committee 
indicates that the existing rules in Part III have often proven confusing, lacking in 
guidance, or inadequate to address the increasing number and complexity of 
grievances alleging violations of the Mediator Rules or issues of good moral 
 
- 2 - 
character in applicants for mediator certification.  Accordingly, the proposals here 
are intended to close existing gaps in the rules, memorialize and clarify current 
procedures, and address situations for which no direction existed. 
 
Because the Committee did not publish its proposals before submitting them, 
the Court published the proposed amendments for comment.  We received 
comments from the Mediation/Arbitration Division of the Eleventh Judicial 
Circuit, and from the Alternative Dispute Resolution Section of The Florida Bar.  
The Committee filed a response to the comments; in some instances, its response 
included revised rule proposals.  The Court heard oral argument on the proposed 
amendments. 
 
We have fully considered the Committee’s proposals, the comments, and the 
issues raised at oral argument.  As discussed in this opinion, we adopt the 
Committee’s proposed amendments, with some modifications.  We discuss some 
of the more significant amendments to the Mediator Rules below. 
AMENDMENTS 
 
Initially, the title of Part III of the Mediator Rules is changed to “Mediation 
Certification Applications and Discipline,” in order to better reflect that this Part 
covers both discipline of certified mediators and the qualifications for applicants 
for mediator certification.  Similarly, rule 10.700 (Scope and Purpose) is amended, 
as proposed by the Committee, to clarify that Part III applies to all proceedings 
 
- 3 - 
before investigatory committees and adjudicatory panels of the Mediator 
Qualifications and Discipline Review Board (MQDRB) (formerly the Mediator 
Qualifications Board), including applications for certification, as well as discipline 
of certified and court-appointed mediators. 
 
Rule 10.720 (Definitions) is amended to include several new definitions.  
Subdivision (a) (Applicant) provides that the term “applicant” encompasses any 
new applicant for mediator certification, applicants seeking renewal of a current 
certification, applicants applying for additional types of certifications, or applicants 
seeking reinstatement of a certification.  Subdivision (e) (File) provides a new 
definition for the term “file,” now requiring persons to deliver any pleadings, 
motions, instruments, or other papers to the Dispute Resolution Center.  
Additionally, we add new subdivisions (j) (Panel Adviser) and (k) (Prosecutor).  A 
panel adviser is a member of The Florida Bar retained by the Dispute Resolution 
Center to assist the hearing panel in performing its functions during a hearing.  The 
prosecutor is a member of the Bar retained by the Center to prosecute a complaint 
before a hearing panel.  The prosecutor is authorized to perform additional 
investigation to prepare a case, negotiate a consent to charges and an agreement to 
the imposition of sanctions, and to fully prosecute the case.   
 
Also in rule 10.720, we have amended or added several new terms to reflect 
the new procedures in Part III for handling grievances.  Under these amended 
 
- 4 - 
rules, grievances alleging issues of good moral character in applicants, and 
grievances alleging violations of the Mediator Rules by certified and court-
appointed mediators, will be processed in separate tracks.  Accordingly, the 
general term “complaint” in existing subdivision (c) is deleted and replaced with 
the new terms “Good Moral Character Inquiry” in subdivision (f) and “Rule 
Violation Complaint” in subdivision (m).  As proposed by the Committee, a “Good 
Moral Character Inquiry” is the process that is initiated when the Dispute 
Resolution Center becomes aware of information relating to the good moral 
character of any certified or court-appointed mediator or applicant for certification, 
and a “Rule Violation Complaint” is the formal submission by any person or the 
Dispute Resolution Center of an alleged rule violation committed by a certified or 
court-appointed mediator.  Similarly, the terms “Qualifications Complaint 
Committee” and “Complaint Committee” are deleted and replaced with the terms 
“Qualifications Inquiry Committee,” or QIC, in new subdivision (l) and “Rule 
Violation Complaint Committee,” or RVCC, in new subdivision (n).  The QIC is 
composed of four members of the MQDRB selected by rotation for a one-year 
term to conduct investigations and dispose of good moral character inquiries; we 
have revised the Committee’s proposal in subdivision (l) to clarify that the QIC 
will conduct investigations and address good moral character inquiries for any 
applicant.  The RVCC will be composed of three members of the MQDRB 
 
- 5 - 
selected by rotation to investigate and dispose of a specific rule violation complaint 
against a certified or court-appointed mediator.  The QIC and the RVCC serve as 
the investigatory arm of the process; once the QIC or the RVCC determines there 
is probable cause, the case is assigned to a panel for adjudication.  As proposed by 
the Committee, subdivision (i) (Panel) now provides that the panel will be 
composed of five members of the MQDRB selected by rotation to adjudicate 
formal charges resulting from a rule violation or good moral character complaint.  
Panel members will be selected from the division of the MQDRB where the 
complaint arose, unless the Director of the Dispute Resolution Center finds good 
reason to choose members from another division. 
 
We next amend rule 10.730 (Mediator Qualifications and Discipline Review 
Board), in subdivision (a) (Generally), to authorize a fourth standing division—the 
Southwest Division—of the MQDRB.  The existing three divisions are labeled 
“Northern,” “Central,” and “Southeast,” respectively.  Subdivision (b)(5) 
(Composition of Divisions; Dependency Mediators) of rule 10.730 is amended to 
require that at least one dependency mediator serving as a member in each standing 
division of the MQDRB must be a non-lawyer.  We also amend subdivision (b)(7) 
(Composition of Divisions; Attorneys) to allow both currently licensed attorneys 
and previously licensed attorneys who have or had a substantial trial or appellate 
practice, and who have knowledge of and experience with mediation practice, 
 
- 6 - 
statutes, and rules, to serve as members.  Subdivision (c) (Appointment and Term) 
is amended to provide that members of the MQDRB shall not serve more than 
three consecutive terms.  Finally, subdivisions (d) (Rule Violation Complaint 
Committee (RVCC)), (e) (Qualifications Inquiry Committee (QIC)), and (f) 
(Panels), are amended, as proposed by the Committee, to clarify the composition of 
the RVCC, the QIC, and the hearing panel.  As we have discussed, the RVCC will 
be composed of three members of the MQDRB selected to investigate a specific 
rule violation complaint against a certified or court-appointed mediator; each 
RVCC will cease to exist after disposing of the complaint to which it was assigned.  
To the extent possible, members of the RVCC will be selected from the division 
where the alleged rule violation occurred.  The QIC is composed of four members, 
one from each of the four divisions of the MQDRB, selected to serve a one-year 
term and to investigate all good moral character inquiries that may arise during that 
period.  And the hearing panel will be composed of five members of the MQDRB 
selected on a rotation basis; like the RVCC, the panel is assigned to a single case 
and will cease to exist after the case is decided. 
 
Rule 10.740 (Jurisdiction and Powers) is amended, as recommended by the 
Committee, to more clearly identify the powers of the RVCC, the QIC, the hearing 
panel and the chair of the panel, and the new Contempt/Disqualification Judge.  
Subdivisions (a) (RVCC) and (b) (QIC) provide that the judge or attorney serving 
 
- 7 - 
as chair of the committee shall have the power to compel: the attendance of any 
person at a proceeding before the RVCC or the QIC; statements, testimony, and 
depositions from any person; and the production of documents, records, and other 
evidence.  The RVCC and the QIC also have the authority to resolve cases prior to 
referring them to a panel.  Subdivision (d) (Panel Chair) outlines the powers of the 
judge serving as chair of the hearing panel.  These are largely the same as those in 
the current rule, except that the chair shall now have the power to implement 
procedures during the hearing, determine the admissibility of evidence, and decide 
motions.  Finally, we add a new subdivision (e) (Contempt/Disqualification Judge) 
to rule 10.740, as proposed by the Committee in its response to comments, to 
provide that one judge member from each division of the MQDRB shall be 
designated to serve as the Contempt/Disqualification Judge for a one-year term.  
The Contempt/Disqualification Judge will hear all motions for contempt at the 
complaint committee level—including motions for contempt filed by the RVCC or 
the QIC and those brought by the mediator or applicant—as well as motions to 
disqualify any member of the RVCC, the QIC, or the Panel Chair. 
 
Rule 10.750 (Contempt Process) will now serve as a stand-alone rule 
addressing the contempt process.  The rule, as proposed by the Committee in 
response to comments, provides in subdivision (a) (General) that, if any person 
fails to respond to a lawful subpoena of the RVCC, QIC, or panel, refuses to 
 
- 8 - 
answer all inquiries or to turn over all evidence lawfully subpoenaed, or engages in 
disorderly conduct, he or she may be found in contempt.  Subdivision (b) (RVCC 
or QIC Contempt) states that a motion for contempt, together with a proposed 
order to show cause, may be filed before the Contempt/Disqualification Judge in 
the division where the matter is pending.  Alternatively, subdivision (c) (Panel 
Contempt) provides that the chair of a panel may hear motions for contempt filed 
either before or during a hearing, or for conduct occurring during the hearing.  
 
We adopt new rule 10.760 (Duty to Inform), requiring a certified mediator to 
inform the Dispute Resolution Center in writing within thirty days of having been 
reprimanded, sanctioned, or otherwise disciplined by any court, administrative 
agency, bar association, or other professional group.  We have modified the 
Committee’s proposal to delete the term “admonish” and we emphasize that this 
rule requires certified mediators to report only those actions that the sanctioning 
entity would consider to be a disciplinary measure. 
 
We made significant amendments to rule 10.800 (Good Moral Character 
Inquiry Process), as proposed by the Committee, to clarify procedures for 
investigating an applicant’s good moral character, from the filing of an “inquiry” to 
the preparation of formal charges for submission to a hearing panel.  Initially, 
subdivision (a) (Generally) now provides that any issues pertaining to the good 
moral character of an applicant will be heard by the QIC, which will determine if 
 
- 9 - 
the applicant has the good moral character necessary for certification pursuant to 
Mediator Rule 10.110 (Good Moral Character).1  As the first step in this process, 
pursuant to subdivision (c) (Initial Review), the Dispute Resolution Center will 
review applications for certification to determine whether the applicant appears to 
meet the standards for good moral character in rule 10.110.  If the Center’s review 
raises questions as to the applicant’s good moral character, it shall request that the 
applicant supply additional information.  Thereafter, if the information continues to 
raise questions as to the applicant’s character, the Dispute Resolution Center will 
forward the application and supporting materials to the QIC as an “inquiry.”  
Subdivision (e) (Notification) requires the Dispute Resolution Center, within ten 
days of referring a matter to the QIC, to send notice of the inquiry to the applicant. 
 
Subdivisions (d) (Process), (f) (Investigation), (g) (QIC Meeting with the 
Applicant), (h) (Notice and Publication), (i) (Review), (j) (No Probable Cause), (k) 
(Probable Cause and Formal Charges), (l) (Withdrawal of Application), and (m) 
(Panel) in rule 10.800 outline the QIC’s process in reviewing an “inquiry.”  
Pursuant to subdivision (d)(1), pertaining to new applications for certification, and 
                                          
 
 
1.  Rule 10.110 provides that no person shall be certified as a mediator 
unless he or she “first produces satisfactory evidence of good moral character.”  
The rule outlines eleven factors to consider in assessing whether the applicant’s or 
mediator’s conduct demonstrates a lack of good moral character.  See Fla. R. Med. 
10.110(a), (c)(4). 
 
- 10 - 
subdivision (d)(2), relating to applicants seeking a renewal of certification, the QIC 
may review inquiries submitted by the Dispute Resolution Center and recommend 
approving the application.  Alternatively, if the QIC finds reason to believe that the 
applicant lacks good moral character it may: offer the applicant an opportunity to 
withdraw his or her application prior to finding probable cause; allow the applicant 
to satisfy additional conditions; or prepare a complaint.  Subdivisions (d)(1)(C) and 
(d)(2)(C) provide that the complaint will be submitted to the Dispute Resolution 
Center for forwarding to the applicant.  The applicant shall respond to the 
complaint within twenty days of receiving it (unless the Dispute Resolution Center 
extends the time in writing).  After receiving the applicant’s response, the QIC may 
dismiss the complaint and approve the application or it may make a finding of 
probable cause.  More specifically, subdivision (i) (Review) provides that the QIC 
shall review all information before it and determine if there is probable cause to 
believe that the alleged conduct would constitute evidence of the applicant’s lack 
of good moral character.  Pursuant to subdivision (j) (No Probable Cause), if the 
QIC finds no probable cause, it will dismiss the inquiry and advise the applicant in 
writing.  Alternatively, under subdivision (k) (Probable Cause and Formal 
Charges), if the QIC finds probable cause to believe that the applicant lacks the 
good moral character necessary to be certified as a mediator, it will draft formal 
charges and forward such charges to the Dispute Resolution Center for assignment 
 
- 11 - 
to a hearing panel.  The charges shall include a statement of the matters regarding 
the applicant’s lack of good moral character, with references to the related rules.  
Finally, pursuant to subdivision (l) (Withdrawal of Application), if an applicant 
withdraws his or her application for certification, the QIC does not lose its 
jurisdiction to continue prosecuting the case under these procedures. 
 
The commenters argue that rule 10.800 (and rules 10.810 (Rule Violations 
Complaint Process) and 10.820 (Hearing Panel Procedures), discussed below) do 
not impose specific time frames for the QIC (and the RVCC and hearing panel) to 
act, but do impose such time frames on the applicant or mediator, in violation of 
fundamental fairness and due process.  As the Committee points out in its 
response, both the Rules of the Supreme Court Relating to Admissions to the Bar 
and the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar, on which these Mediator Rules are 
modeled, also do not impose specific time frames for the Florida Board of Bar 
Examiners or The Florida Bar to act in their investigations.  However, in adopting 
rules 10.800, 10.810, and 10.820, we express no opinion as to their 
constitutionality.  See Amends. to Fla. Family Law Rules of Pro. (Rule 12.525), 
897 So. 2d 467, 468 (Fla. 2005) (“In adopting this rule, we express no opinion as 
to its constitutionality.”); Amend. to Rules of Juvenile Pro., Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.350, 
842 So. 2d 763, 768 (Fla. 2003) (“In adopting this rule, we express no opinion as 
to its constitutionality.”).   
 
- 12 - 
 
We also made substantial amendments to rule 10.810 (Rule Violations 
Complaint Process).  This rule will now exclusively address the procedures for 
reviewing and investigating alleged violations of the Mediator Rules.  First, in 
subdivision (a) (Initiation of Complaint), an individual or the Dispute Resolution 
Center may file a complaint alleging that a mediator violated one or more of the 
Mediator Rules.  Complaints filed by individuals must be written, sworn, and 
notarized; a complaint initiated by the Dispute Resolution Center need not be 
sworn or notarized, but must be signed by the Center’s director or staff attorney.  
Pursuant to subdivision (b) (Filing), all complaints must be filed with the Dispute 
Resolution Center, which will stamp the complaint with the date of receipt.   
When the Dispute Resolution Center receives a complaint, subdivision (c) 
(Assignment to a Rules Violation Complaint Committee (RVCC)) of rule 10.810 
requires it to assign the complaint to a RVCC within a reasonable period of time.  
The Dispute Resolution Center will send a notice of the complaint to the mediator 
“as soon as practical.”  Thereafter, under subdivision (d) (Facial Sufficiency 
Determination), the RVCC will convene by conference call to determine whether 
the allegations, if true, would constitute a violation of the Mediator Rules.  If the 
RVCC determines that the complaint is facially insufficient, it is dismissed without 
prejudice and the complainant notified.  We have revised the Committee’s 
proposal in subdivision (d)(1) to allow the complainant only one opportunity to re-
 
- 13 - 
file the complaint and establish facial sufficiency.  If the RVCC determines that the 
complaint is facially sufficient, it will prepare a list of the rules that may have been 
violated and submit the list to the Dispute Resolution Center.  Subdivision (e) 
(Service) requires the Center to serve the mediator, either electronically or by 
certified mail, with the list of alleged rule violations, a copy of the complaint, and a 
link to an electronic copy of the Mediator Rules.  Subdivision (f) (Response) states 
that the mediator must send a written, sworn, and notarized response to the 
complaint by registered or certified mail within twenty days after receiving it.  If 
the mediator fails to respond to the complaint within the time allowed, the 
allegations therein are deemed admitted and the matter may be referred to a 
hearing panel.  Similar to the procedures in rule 10.800, subdivision (k) (Review) 
of rule 10.810 provides that, if no other disposition has occurred, the RVCC shall 
review the complaint, the response from the mediator, and any other information 
available and determine whether there is probable cause to believe that the alleged 
misconduct occurred and would constitute a violation of the Mediator Rules.  
Pursuant to subdivision (l) (No Probable Cause), if the RVCC finds no probable 
cause it will dismiss the complaint with prejudice, and such decision is final.  
Alternatively, under subdivision (m) (Probable Cause Found), if the RVCC finds 
that probable cause exists, it may draft formal charges and forward them to the 
Dispute Resolution Center for assignment to a panel.  The RVCC is also 
 
- 14 - 
authorized to decide not to proceed with a case by filing an “Order of Non-
Referral.”  Finally, subdivision (n) (Formal Charges and Counsel) is amended, as 
proposed by the Committee, to provide that, if the RVCC finds probable cause and 
prepares formal charges, the charges must include a statement of the allegations in 
the complaint, any additional information relevant to the finding of a rule violation, 
and references to the particular rules violated.  The formal charges are signed by 
the chair, or by the other two members of the RVCC.   
We amend rule 10.820 (Hearing Panel Procedures), as recommended by the 
Committee, to more thoroughly address the hearing panel’s process during the 
adjudicatory stage of a case.  Subdivision (a) (Notification of Formal Charges) 
requires that, when the QIC or a RVCC refers formal charges to the Dispute 
Resolution Center, the Center will promptly send a copy of the charges to the 
mediator or applicant (and to the complainant, if any), by certified mail.  
Subdivisions (b) (Prosecutor) and (c) (Panel Adviser) authorize the Dispute 
Resolution Center to retain a prosecutor and panel adviser to assist in the hearing.  
We amend subdivision (f) (Time of the Hearing) to grant the Center additional 
time to schedule a hearing—it is now required to schedule the hearing for a date 
not more than 120 days, and not less than 30 days, from the date of the notice 
advising the mediator or applicant that his or her case has been assigned to the 
panel. 
 
- 15 - 
Also in rule 10.820, subdivision (i) (Procedures for Hearing) is amended to 
outline in one place all the procedures that may apply during a hearing before the 
panel.  We note several of these new procedures.  Subdivision (i)(1) (Panel 
Presence) provides that no hearing shall be conducted without the chair being 
physically present; other panel members must be also be physically present, unless 
the chair determines that exceptional circumstances exist.  Subdivision (i)(5) 
(Testimony) states that testimony may be given through telephonic or other 
communication equipment, upon a showing of good cause to the chair of the panel 
within a reasonable time prior to the hearing.  The Committee indicates in its 
response to comments that any party may file a motion to allow testimony through 
telephonic equipment.  The motion would be set for hearing and both parties 
afforded an opportunity to be heard on the issue.  Subdivision (i)(10) (Mediator’s 
or Applicant’s Failure to Appear) provides that if the mediator or applicant fails to 
appear at the hearing, the panel may nonetheless proceed with the hearing.  If the 
hearing is conducted without the mediator or applicant present, and the mediator or 
applicant did not respond to the underlying complaint (and as a result, the 
allegations in the complaint are deemed admitted), no further notice to the 
mediator or applicant is necessary and the decision of the panel is final.  If the 
hearing is conducted and the mediator or applicant did respond to the underlying 
complaint, the Dispute Resolution Center will notify him or her that the hearing 
 
- 16 - 
occurred and whether sanctions were imposed.  The mediator or applicant may 
petition for rehearing by showing good cause for his or her absence.  The petition 
for rehearing must be received by the Dispute Resolution Center and the 
prosecutor within ten days after the Center notified the mediator or applicant of the 
panel’s decision.  The chair of the panel alone is authorized to conduct a hearing 
and decide the petition.   
 
Rule 10.840 (Sanctions), as amended, now more clearly defines the 
sanctions that may be imposed against both applicants and mediators.  In 
subdivision (b) (Types of Sanctions), we add the denial of an application so that 
the list includes sanctions appropriate for an applicant.  Subdivision (b) also 
includes other sanctions currently authorized in existing Mediator Rules.  We have 
revised the Committee’s proposal in subdivision (b)(7) to limit suspensions to one 
year.2  We have also revised the Committee’s proposal in subdivision (b)(9) to 
limit the types of taxable costs to only those outlined in the rule. 
 
Also in rule 10.840, subdivision (c) (Failure to Comply with Sanctions) sets 
out steps the Dispute Resolution Center may take if a mediator or applicant does 
not comply with any sanction.  If there is a reasonable belief that a mediator or 
applicant failed to comply with a sanction, the Dispute Resolution Center may file 
                                          
 
 
2.  Existing Mediator Rule 10.830(a)(6) limits suspensions to one year. 
 
- 17 - 
a motion for contempt with the Contempt/Disqualification Judge in the division 
where sanctions were agreed to or imposed.  The mediator or applicant is served 
with a copy of the motion and shall file a response within twenty days.  If no 
response is received, the allegations in the motion are deemed admitted.  The 
Dispute Resolution Center will set a hearing before the Contempt/Disqualification 
Judge, with notice to the mediator or applicant.  We have revised the Committee’s 
proposal in subdivision (c)(4), and we emphasize that the contempt hearing may 
address only those allegations of which the mediator or applicant has notice.  
However, subdivision (c)(4) provides that the holding of a hearing shall not 
preclude subsequent hearings on any other alleged failures to comply with a 
sanctions order or agreement.  Any sanctions previously imposed against the 
mediator or applicant will continue in effect until the Contempt/Disqualification 
Judge reaches a decision.  Finally, a finding by the Contempt/Disqualification 
Judge of a willful failure to substantially comply with any sanction shall result in 
the automatic decertification of the mediator for no less than two years. 
 
In rule 10.850 (Suspension, Decertification, Denial of Application, and 
Removal), subdivision (a) (Suspension) provides that during a period of 
suspension, a mediator must continue to comply with all requirements for 
certification, including submission of a renewal application, fees, and continuing 
education requirements.  Additionally, subdivision (c) (Automatic Decertification 
 
- 18 - 
or Automatic Denial of Application), as proposed by the Committee, now outlines 
instances requiring the automatic decertification of a mediator, or the automatic 
denial of an application for certification.  Pursuant to subdivision (c)(1) 
(Conviction of Felony of Certified Mediator), if the Dispute Resolution Center 
finds that a certified mediator has a felony conviction, the mediator is 
automatically decertified; he or she may not apply for certification for two years, 
or until civil rights are restored, whichever occurs later.  Similarly, in subdivision 
(c)(2) (Conviction of Felony of Applicant), if the Center finds that an applicant has 
a felony conviction and his or her civil rights have not been restored, the 
application will be automatically denied.  Subdivision (c)(3) (Revocation of 
Professional License of Certified Mediator) requires that, if the Dispute Resolution 
Center finds that a certified mediator has been disbarred from any state or federal 
bar or has had any other professional license revoked, he or she will be 
automatically decertified, and is ineligible to reapply for certification for two years.  
And subdivision (c)(4) (Revocation of Professional License of Applicant) provides 
that, if the Center finds that an applicant has been disbarred from any state or 
federal bar or has had a professional license revoked, the applicant will be 
automatically denied certification and is precluded from reapplying for a period of 
two years.  We amend the remaining subdivisions in rule 10.850 as proposed by 
the Committee in its response to comments. 
 
- 19 - 
 
Rule 10.870 (Confidentiality) will now address confidentiality of 
proceedings under the Mediator Rules.  As recommended by the Committee, we 
have substantially amended existing provisions addressing confidentiality 
consistent with those adopted by the Court in May 1992, prior to the adoption of 
article I, section 24 (Access to Public Records and Meetings) of the Florida 
Constitution.  Proposed Stds. of Prof. Conduct for Certified and Court-Appointed 
Mediators, 604 So. 2d 764 (Fla. 1992).  The rule now provides that, until the 
finding of probable cause, all communications and proceedings are confidential.  
Upon the filing of formal charges, the formal charges and all documents created 
subsequent to the filing of formal charges shall be public, with the exception of 
those matters that are otherwise confidential under law or court rule. 
 
Finally, we adopt new rule 10.890 (Limitation on Time to Initiate a 
Complaint), as proposed by the Committee in its response to comments, to set 
limits on the time to file a complaint alleging a violation of the Mediator Rules or 
an issue of good moral character.  Subdivision (a) (Rule Violations) requires that 
complaints alleging violations of the Mediator Rules shall not be filed more than 
two years after the date on which the party had a reasonable opportunity to 
discover the alleged violation, and in no event more than four years after the matter 
occurred.  Pursuant to subdivision (b) (Felonies), there is no limit on the time to 
file a complaint alleging a felony conviction by a mediator or applicant.  And 
 
- 20 - 
subdivision (c) (Good Moral Character) states that a complaint alleging an issue of 
good moral character pertaining to an applicant for certification shall not be filed 
more than four years after the Dispute Resolution Center discovered the matter. 
CONCLUSION 
 
Accordingly, we amend the Florida Rules for Certified and Court-Appointed 
Mediators as reflected in the appendix to this opinion.  New language is indicated 
by underscoring; deletions are indicated by struck-through type.  The committee 
notes are offered for explanation only and are not adopted as an official part of the 
rules.  The amendments shall become effective January 1, 2017, at 12:01 a.m. 
 
It is so ordered. 
LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON, 
and PERRY, JJ., concur. 
 
THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER THE 
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THESE AMENDMENTS. 
 
Original Proceeding – Florida Rules for Certified and Court-Appointed Mediators 
 
Judge Rodney Smith, Chair, Committee on Alternative Dispute Resolution  
Rules and Policy, Miami, Florida; Judge William David Palmer, Past Chair,  
Committee on Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules and Policy, Daytona Beach,  
Florida; and Susan Carolyn Marvin, Staff Liaison, Office of the State Courts  
Administrator, Tallahassee, Florida, 
 
 
for Petitioners 
 
Linda Kelly Kearson, General Counsel, Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Florida,  
Miami, Florida; and David Robert Hoyle, Chair, The Executive Council of the  
Alternative Dispute Resolution Section of The Florida Bar, Bradenton, Florida,   
 
 
- 21 - 
 
Responding with Comments 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
- 22 - 
APPENDIX 
 
 
PART II. 
STANDARDS OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT 
 
RULE 10.200. 
SCOPE AND PURPOSE 
 
These Rules provide ethical standards of conduct for certified and court‐appointed 
mediators.  Court-appointed mediators are mediators selected by the parties or 
appointed by the court as the mediator in court-ordered mediations.  TheyThese 
Rules are intended to both guide mediators in the performance of their services and 
instill public confidence in the mediation process. The public’s use, understanding, 
and satisfaction with mediation can only be achieved if mediators embrace the 
highest ethical principles. Whether the parties involved in a mediation choose to 
resolve their dispute is secondary in importance to whether the mediator conducts 
the mediation in accordance with these ethical standards. 
 
Committee Notes 
 
2000 Revision. In early 1991, the Florida Supreme Court Standing Committee on 
Mediation and Arbitration Rules was commissioned by the Chief Justice to 
research, draft and present for adoption both a comprehensive set of ethical 
standards for Florida mediators and procedural rules for their enforcement. To 
accomplish this task, the Committee divided itself into two sub‐committees and, 
over the remainder of the year, launched parallel programs to research and develop 
the requested ethical standards and grievance procedures.   
 
The Subcommittee on Ethical Standards began its task by searching the nation for 
other states or private dispute resolution organizations who had completed any 
significant work in defining the ethical responsibilities of professional mediators. 
After searching for guidance outside the state, the subcommittee turned to 
Florida’s own core group of certified mediators for more direct and firsthand data. 
Through a series of statewide public hearings and meetings, the subcommittee 
gathered current information on ethical concerns based upon the expanding 
experiences of practicing Florida certified mediators. In May of 1992, Tthe 
“Florida Rules for Certified and Court- Appointed Mediators” became effective.   
 
In the years following the adoption of those ethical rules, the Committee observed 
their impact on the mediation profession. By 1998, several other states and dispute 
resolution organizations initiated research into ethical standards for mediation 
 
- 23 - 
which also became instructive to the Committee. In addition, Florida’s Mediator 
Qualifications Advisory Panel, created to field ethical questions from practicing 
mediators, gained a wealth of pragmatic experience in the application of ethical 
concepts to actual practice that became available to the Committee. Finally, Tthe 
Florida Mediator Qualifications and Discipline Review Board, the disciplinary 
body for mediators, developed specific data from actual grievances filed against 
mediators over the past several years, which also added to the available body of 
knowledge.  
 
Using this new body of information and experience, the Committee undertook a 
yearlong study program to determine if Florida’s ethical rules for mediators would 
benefit from review and revision.  
 
Upon reviewing the 1992 ethical Rules, it immediately became apparent to the 
Committee that reorganization, renumbering, and more descriptive titles would 
make the Rules more useful.  For that reason, the Rules were reorganized into four 
substantive groups which recognized a mediator’s ethical responsibilities to the 
“parties,” the “process,” the “profession” and the “courts.”  The intent of the 
Committee here was to simply make the Rules easier to locate. There is no official 
significance in the order in which the Rules appear; any one area is equally 
important as all other areas. The Committee recognizes many rules overlap and 
define specific ethical responsibilities which impact more than one area. Clearly, a 
violation of a rule in one section may very well injure relationships protected in 
another section.  
 
Titles to the Rules were changed to more accurately reflect their content. 
Additionally, redundancies were eliminated, phrasing tightened, and grammatical 
changes made to more clearly state their scope and purpose.   
 
Finally, the Committee sought to apply what had been learned. The 2000 revisions 
are the result of that effort. 
 
 
PART III. DISCIPLINEMEDIATION CERTIFICATION APPLICATIONS 
AND DISCIPLINE 
 
RULE 10.700. 
SCOPE AND PURPOSE 
 
These rules apply to all proceedings before all panels andinvestigatory committees 
and adjudicatory panels of the mediator qualifications boardMediator 
 
- 24 - 
Qualifications and Discipline Review Board (MQDRB) involving theapplications 
for certification or discipline or suspension of certified mediators or non-certified 
mediators and court-appointed to mediate a case pursuant to court rulesmediators.  
The purpose of these rules of discipline is to provide a means for enforcing the 
Florida Rules for Certified and Court-Appointed Mediators (Rules). 
 
 
RULE 10.710. 
PRIVILEGE TO MEDIATE 
 
CertificationThe privilege to mediate as a certified or court-appointed mediator is 
conditional, confers no vested right to the holder thereof, but is a conditional 
privilege that, and is revocable for cause. 
 
 
RULE 10.720. 
DEFINITIONS 
 
(a) 
Board. The mediator qualifications board.Applicant.  A new 
applicant with no previous certifications, an applicant for renewal of a current 
certification, an applicant for additional certifications, and an applicant for 
reinstatement of certification. 
 
(b) 
Center. The Florida Dispute Resolution Center of the Office of the 
State Courts Administrator.Court-Appointed.  Being appointed by the court or 
selected by the parties as the mediator in a court-ordered mediation. 
 
(c) 
Complaint. Formal submission of an alleged violation of the Rules 
for Certified and Court-Appointed Mediators, including allegations of a lack of 
good moral character. A complaint may originate from any person or from the 
center. 
 
(d) 
Complaint Committee. Three members of the board from the 
division in which a complaint against a mediator originates. 
 
(e) 
Counsel. Counsel appointed by the center, at the direction of the 
complaint committee, responsible for presenting the complaint to the panel. 
 
(f) 
Division.  One of 3the standing divisions of the mediator 
qualifications board,MQDRB established on a regional basis. 
 
 
- 25 - 
(d) 
DRC or Center.  The Florida Dispute Resolution Center of the Office 
of the State Courts Administrator. 
 
(e) 
File.  To deliver to the office of the Florida Dispute Resolution Center 
of the Office of the State Courts Administrator pleadings, motions, instruments, 
and other papers for preservation and reference. 
 
(f) 
Good Moral Character Inquiry.  A process which is initiated based 
on information which comes to the attention of the DRC relating to the good moral 
character of a certified or court-appointed mediator or applicant for certification. 
 
(g) 
Investigator.  A certified mediator, attorneylawyer, or other qualified 
individual appointedretained by the centerDRC at the direction of a complaint 
committeeRVCC or a QIC to conduct an investigation. 
 
(h) 
Mediator. A person certified by the Florida Supreme Court or an 
individual mediating pursuant to court order.MQDRB or Board.  The Mediator 
Qualifications and Discipline Review Board. 
 
(i) 
Panel.  Five members of the boardMQDRB selected by the DRC by 
rotation to adjudicate the formal charges associated with a rule violation or a good 
moral character complaint, selected from the division in which athe complaint 
against a mediator originatesarose unless, in the discretion of the DRC Director, 
there is good reason to choose members from 1 of the other divisions. 
 
(j) 
Qualifications Complaint Committee. Three members of the board 
selected for the purpose of considering referrals pursuant to rule 10.800.Panel 
Adviser.  A member of The Florida Bar retained by the DRC to assist a panel in 
performing its functions during a hearing.  A panel adviser provides procedural 
advice only, is in attendance at the hearing, is not part of the panel’s private 
deliberations, but may sit in on deliberations in order to answer procedural 
questions and is authorized to draft the decision and opinion of the panel for 
approval by the full panel and execution by the Chair. 
 
(k) 
Prosecutor.  A member of The Florida Bar in good standing retained 
by the DRC to prosecute a complaint before a hearing panel.  The Prosecutor is 
authorized to perform additional investigation in order to prepare the case, 
negotiate a consent to charges and an agreement to the imposition of sanctions to 
be presented to the panel prior to the hearing, and to fully prosecute the case, 
including any post hearing proceedings. 
 
- 26 - 
 
(l) 
Qualifications Inquiry Committee or QIC.  Four members of the 
MQDRB, no more than 1 from each division, selected by the DRC by rotation to 
serve for a 1-year period to conduct investigations and disposition of any good 
moral character inquiry for any applicant. 
 
(m) 
Rule Violation Complaint.  Formal submission of alleged 
violation(s) of the Florida Rules for Certified and Court-Appointed Mediators.  A 
complaint may originate from any person or from the DRC. 
 
(n) 
Rule Violation Complaint Committee or RVCC.  Three members 
of the MQDRB selected by the DRC by rotation to conduct the investigation and 
disposition of any rule violation complaint. 
 
 
RULE 10.730. 
MEDIATOR QUALIFICATIONS AND DISCIPLINE 
REVIEW BOARD 
 
(a) 
Generally.  The mediator qualifications boardMediator Qualifications 
and Discipline Review Board (MQDRB) shall be composed of 34 standing 
divisions that shall be located in the following regions: 
 
(1) 
One division in north Florida,Northern:  encompassing the 
First, Second, Third, Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth judicial circuits; 
 
(2) 
One division in central Florida,Central:  encompassing the 
Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth, Twelfth, Thirteenth, and Eighteenth and 
Nineteenth judicial circuits; 
 
(3) 
One division in south Florida,Southeast:  encompassing the 
Eleventh, Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Seventeenth, Nineteenth, and Twentieth judicial 
circuits.; and 
 
(4) 
Southwest:  encompassing the Sixth, Twelfth, Thirteenth, and 
Twentieth judicial circuits. 
 
Other divisions may be formed by the supreme courtSupreme Court of 
Florida based on need. 
 
 
- 27 - 
(b) 
Composition of Divisions.  Each division of the boardMQDRB shall 
be composed of: 
 
(1) 
Judges:  three circuit or, county, or appellate judges; 
 
(2) 
County Mediators:  three certified county mediators; 
 
(3) 
Circuit Mediators:  three certified circuit court mediators; 
 
(4) 
Family Mediators:  three certified family mediators, at least 2 
of whom shall be non-lawyers; 
 
(5) 
Dependency Mediators:  not less than 1 nor more than 3 
certified dependency mediators, at least 1 of whom shall be a non-lawyer; 
 
(6) 
Appellate Mediators:  not less than 1 nor more than 3 certified 
appellate mediators; and 
 
(7) 
Attorneys:  three attorneys who are currently or were 
previously licensed to practice law in Florida for at least 3 years who have or had a 
substantial trial or appellate practice and are neither certified as mediators nor 
judicial officers during their terms of service on the boardMQDRB but who have a 
knowledge of and experience with mediation practice, statutes, and rules, at least 1 
of whom shall have a substantial dissolution of marriagefamily law practice. 
 
(c) 
Appointment; Terms and Term.  Eligible persons shall be appointed 
to the boardMQDRB by the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Florida for a 
period of 4 years. The terms of the boardMQDRB members shall be staggered.  No 
member of the MQDRB shall serve more than 3 consecutive terms. The term of 
any member serving on a committee or panel may continue until the final 
disposition of their service on a case. 
 
(d) 
Rule Violation Complaint Committee (RVCC).  Each complaint 
committee of the boardRVCC shall be composed of 3 members. of the MQDRB 
selected by the DRC on a rotation basis.  To the extent possible, members of a 
RVCC shall be selected from the division in which the alleged violation occurred.  
RVCCs are assigned to a single case; however they may be assigned to related 
cases to be disposed of collectively as is deemed appropriate by the DRC Director.  
A complaint committeeRVCC shall cease to exist after disposingthe disposition of 
 
- 28 - 
allthe case(s) to which they are assigned cases.  Each complaint committeeRVCC 
shall be composed of: 
 
(1) 
[No Change] 
 
(2) 
one mediator, who is certified in the area to which the 
complaint refers; and 
 
(3) 
[No Change] 
 
(e) 
Qualifications ComplaintInquiry Committee (QIC).  One member 
of each division shall serve as a member of the qualifications complaint 
committeeEach QIC shall be composed of 4 members, 1 from each of the 4 
divisions of the MQDRB, selected by the DRC on a rotation basis to serve for a 
period of 1 year or until completion of all assigned cases, whichever occurs later.  
The qualifications complaint committeeQIC shall be composed of: 
 
 
(1) 
[No Change] 
 
 
(2) 
twothree certified mediators.   
 
(f) 
Panels.  Each panel of the board shall be composed of 5 members of 
the MQDRB selected by the DRC on a rotation basis.  To the extent possible, 
members shall be selected from the division in which the alleged violation 
occurred or, in the case of a good moral character inquiry, from the division based 
on the Florida address of the subject of the inquiry.  Panels are assigned to a single 
case; however, they may be assigned to related cases to be disposed of collectively 
as is deemed appropriate by the DRC Director.  A panel shall cease to exist after 
disposing of all assigned cases to which it is assigned.  Each panel shall be 
composed of: 
 
(1) 
one circuit or county judge, who shall serve as the chair; 
 
(2) 
three certified mediators, at least 1 of whom shall be certified in 
the area to which the complaint or inquiry refers; and 
 
(3) 
one attorney who shall serve as vice-chair.  The vice-chair shall 
act as the chair of the panel in the event of the unavailability of the chair. 
 
 
- 29 - 
(g) 
Panel Vice Chair.  Each panel once appointed shall elect a vice-chair.  
The vice-chair shall act as the chair of the panel in the absence of the 
chair.Decision making.  For all RVCCs, QICs, and panels, while unanimity is the 
preferred method of decision making, a majority vote shall rule. 
 
Committee Notes 
 
2000 Revision.  In relation to (b)(5), the Committee believes that the Chiefchief 
Justicejustice should have discretion in the number of dependency mediators 
appointed to the Boardboard depending on the number of certified dependency 
mediators available for appointment.  It is the intention of the Committee that 
when dependency mediation reaches a comparable level of activity to the other 
three3 areas of certification, the full complement of three3 representatives per 
division should be realized. 
 
 
RULE 10.740. 
JURISDICTION AND POWERS 
 
(a) 
Complaint CommitteeRVCC.  Each complaint committeeRVCC 
shall have such jurisdiction and powers as are necessary to conduct the proper and 
speedy investigation and disposition of any complaint.  The judge or attorney 
presiding overchairing the complaint committeeRVCC shall have the power to 
compel the attendance of witnesses, to take or to cause to be taken the depositions 
of witnesses, and to order the production of records or other documentary 
evidence, and the power of contempt.  The complaint committee shall perform its 
investigatory function and have concomitant power to resolve cases prior to panel 
referral.: 
 
(1) 
attendance of any person at a RVCC proceeding; 
 
(2) 
statements, testimony, and depositions of any person; and 
 
(3) 
production of documents, records, and other evidence. 
 
The RVCC shall perform its investigatory function and have concomitant 
power to resolve cases prior to panel referral. 
 
(b) 
Qualifications Complaint CommitteeQIC.  The qualifications 
complaint committee shall have jurisdiction over all matters referred pursuant to 
rule 10.800.  The qualifications complaint committeeQIC shall have such 
 
- 30 - 
jurisdiction and powers as are necessary to conduct the proper and speedy 
investigation and disposition of: any good moral character complaintinquiry 
pursuant to rule 10.800; petitions for reinstatement; or other matters referred by the 
centerDRC.  The judge or attorney presiding overchairing the qualifications 
complaint committeeQIC shall have the power to compel the attendance of 
witnesses, to take or to cause to be taken the depositions of witnesses, and to order 
the production of records or other documentary evidence, and the power of 
contempt.  The qualifications complaint committee shall perform its investigatory 
function and have concomitant power to resolve cases prior to panel referral.: 
 
(1) 
attendance of any person at a QIC proceeding; 
 
(2) 
statements, testimony, and depositions of any person; and 
 
(3) 
production of documents, records, and other evidence. 
 
The QIC shall perform its investigatory function and have concomitant 
power to resolve cases prior to panel referral. 
 
(c) 
Panel.  Each panel shall have such jurisdiction and powers as are 
necessary to conduct the proper and speedy adjudication and disposition of any 
proceeding before it.  The judge presiding over each panel shall have the power to 
compel the attendance of witnesses, to take or to cause to be taken the depositions 
of witnesses, to order the production of records or other documentary evidence, 
and the power of contempt.  The panel shall perform the adjudicatory function, but 
shall not have any investigatory functions. 
 
(d) 
Contempt.  Should any witness fail, without justification, to respond 
to the lawful subpoena of the complaint committee, the qualifications complaint 
committee, or the panel or, having responded, fail or refuse to answer all inquiries 
or to turn over evidence that has been lawfully subpoenaed, or should any person 
be guilty of disorderly or contemptuous conduct before any proceeding of the 
complaint committee, the qualifications complaint committee, or the panel, a 
motion may be filed by the complaint committee, the qualifications complaint 
committee, or the panel before the circuit court of the county in which the 
contemptuous act was committed. The motion shall allege the specific failure on 
the part of the witness or the specific disorderly or contemptuous act of the person 
which forms the basis of the alleged contempt of the complaint committee, the 
qualifications complaint committee, or the panel. Such motion shall pray for the 
issuance of an order to show cause before the circuit court why the circuit court 
 
- 31 - 
should not find the person in contempt of the complaint committee, the 
qualifications complaint committee, or the panel and the person should not be 
punished by the court therefor. The circuit court shall issue such orders and 
judgments therein as the court deems appropriate.Panel Chair.  The chair of a 
panel shall have the power to: 
 
(1) 
compel the attendance of witnesses; 
 
(2) 
issue subpoenas to compel the depositions of witnesses; 
 
(3) 
order the production of records or other documentary evidence; 
 
(4) 
hold anyone in contempt prior to and during the hearing; 
 
(5) 
implement procedures during the hearing; 
 
(6) 
determine admissibility of evidence; and 
 
(7) 
decide motions prior to or during the hearing. 
 
The vice-chair of a panel, upon the unavailability of the chair, is authorized 
only to issue subpoenas or order the production of records or other documentary 
evidence. 
 
(e) 
Contempt/Disqualification Judge.  One MQDRB judge member 
from each division shall be designated by the DRC, to serve for a term of 1 year, to 
hear all motions for contempt at the complaint committee level (RVCC or QIC) 
and hear motions for disqualification of any member of a RVCC, QIC or panel. 
 
 
RULE 10.750. 
STAFFCONTEMPT PROCESS 
 
The center shall provide all staff support to the board necessary to fulfill its duties 
and responsibilities under these rules and perform all other functions specified in 
these rules. 
(a) General.  Should any person fail, without justification, to respond to 
the lawful subpoena of a RVCC, QIC, or panel, or, having responded, fail or refuse 
to answer all inquiries or to turn over evidence that has been lawfully subpoenaed, 
or should any person be guilty of disorderly conduct, that person may be found to 
be in contempt.  
 
- 32 - 
 
(b) RVCC or QIC Contempt.  A motion for contempt based on the 
grounds delineated in subdivision (a) above along with a proposed order to show 
cause may be filed before the contempt/disqualification judge in the division in 
which the matter is pending.  The motion shall allege the specific failure on the 
part of the person or the specific disorderly or contemptuous act of the person 
which forms the basis of the alleged contempt.  
 
(c) 
Panel Contempt.  The chair of a panel may hear any motions filed 
either before or during a hearing or hold any person in contempt for conduct 
occurring during the hearing. 
 
 
RULE 10.760. 
DUTY TO INFORM 
 
A certified mediator shall inform the DRC in writing within 30 days of having 
been reprimanded, sanctioned, or otherwise disciplined by any court, 
administrative agency, bar association, or other professional group. 
 
 
RULE 10.770. 
STAFF 
 
The DRC shall provide all staff support to the MQDRB necessary to fulfill its 
duties and responsibilities under these rules and perform all other functions 
specified in these rules. 
 
 
RULE 10.800. 
GOOD MORAL CHARACTER; PROFESSIONAL 
DISCIPLINE INQUIRY PROCESS 
 
(a) Good Moral Character. 
 
 
(1) 
Prior to approving an applicant for certification or renewal 
as a mediator the center shall review the application to determine whether the 
applicant appears to meet the standards for good moral character. If the center’s 
review of an application for certification or renewal raises any questions regarding 
the applicant's good moral character, the center shall request the applicant to 
supply additional information as necessary. Upon completing this extended review, 
the center shall forward the application and supporting material as a complaint to 
the qualifications complaint committee. 
 
- 33 - 
 
(2) If the center becomes aware of any information concerning a 
certified mediator which could constitute credible evidence of a lack of good moral 
character, the center shall refer such information as a complaint to the 
qualifications complaint committee. 
 
(3) The qualifications complaint committee shall review all 
documentation relating to the good moral character of any applicant or certified 
mediator in a manner consistent, insofar as applicable, with rule 10.810. In relation 
to an applicant, the qualifications complaint committee shall either recommend 
approval or, if it finds there is probable cause to believe that the applicant lacks 
good moral character, it shall refer the matter to a hearing panel for further action. 
In relation to a certified mediator, the qualifications complaint committee shall 
dismiss or, if there is probable cause to believe that the mediator lacks good moral 
character, refer the matter to a hearing panel for further action.  
 
(4) The panel shall take appropriate action on the issue of good 
moral character by dismissing the charges, denying the application in relation to an 
applicant, or imposing sanctions against a certified mediator pursuant to rule 
10.830. 
 
(5) All such hearings shall be held in a manner consistent, insofar as 
applicable, with rule 10.820.Generally.  Good moral character issues of applicants 
shall be heard by the QIC to determine if an applicant has the good moral character 
necessary to be certified pursuant to rule 10.110.  If, during the term of 
certification of a mediator, the DRC becomes aware of any information concerning 
a certified mediator which could constitute credible evidence of a lack of good 
moral character under rule 10.110, the DRC shall refer such information to a 
RVCC as a rule violation complaint pursuant to 10.810.  The QIC and RVCC shall 
be informed of the applicant’s or mediator’s prior disciplinary history. 
 
(b) Professional Licenses and Certifications.   
 
(1) A certified mediator shall inform the center, in writing, of the 
change in status of any professional license held by the mediator within 30 days of 
such change.  
 
(2) 
Upon becoming aware that a certified mediator has been 
disciplined by a professional organization of which that mediator is a member, the 
center shall refer the matter to the qualifications complaint committee.Meetings.  
 
- 34 - 
The QIC shall convene as necessary by conference call or other electronic means 
to consider all cases currently pending before it. 
 
(c) 
Initial Review.  Prior to approving a new or renewal application for 
certification, the DRC shall review the application and any other information to 
determine whether the applicant appears to meet the standards for good moral 
character under rule 10.110.  If the DRC’s review of an application for certification 
or renewal raises any questions regarding the applicant’s good moral character, the 
DRC shall request the applicant to supply additional information as necessary.  
Upon completing this extended review, if the information continues to raise 
questions regarding the applicant’s good moral character, the DRC shall forward 
the application and supporting material as an inquiry to the QIC. 
 
(d) 
Process.  In reviewing all documentation relating to the good moral 
character of any applicant, the QIC shall follow the process below. 
 
(1) 
In relation to a new application, the QIC shall either 
recommend approval or, if it finds there is reason to believe that the applicant lacks 
good moral character, the QIC may do 1 or more of the following: 
 
(A) 
offer the applicant the opportunity to withdraw his/her 
application prior to the finding of probable cause; 
 
(B) 
offer the applicant the opportunity to satisfy additional 
conditions prior to approval of application; or 
 
(C) 
prepare a complaint and submit the complaint to the DRC 
for forwarding to the applicant.  The complaint shall state with particularity the 
specific facts and details that form the basis of the complaint.  The applicant shall 
respond within 20 days of receipt of the complaint unless the time is otherwise 
extended by the DRC in writing. 
 
(i) 
After the response is received, the QIC may: 
 
1.  dismiss the complaint and approve the 
application; or 
 
2.  make a finding of probable cause, prepare 
formal charges, and refer the matter to the DRC for assignment to a panel. 
 
 
- 35 - 
(2) 
In relation to a renewal application, the QIC shall either 
recommend approval or, if it finds there is reason to believe that the renewal 
applicant lacks good moral character, the QIC may do 1 or more of the following: 
 
(A) 
offer the renewal applicant the opportunity to withdraw 
his/her application and may include the necessity to resign any other certifications 
prior to the finding of probable cause; or 
 
(B) 
offer the applicant the opportunity to satisfy additional 
conditions prior to approval of application; or 
 
(C) 
prepare a complaint and submit same to the DRC for 
forwarding to the applicant.  The complaint shall state with particularity the 
specific facts and details that form the basis of the complaint.  The applicant shall 
respond to the complaint within 20 days of receipt unless otherwise extended by 
the DRC in writing. 
 
(i) 
After the response is received, the QIC may: 
 
1.  dismiss the complaint and approve the renewal 
application; or 
 
2.  make a finding of probable cause, prepare 
formal charges and refer the matter to the DRC for assignment to a panel. 
 
(e) 
Notification.  Within 10 days of a matter being referred to the QIC, 
the DRC shall send notification to the applicant of the existence of a good moral 
character inquiry.  Notification to the applicant shall be made by certified mail 
addressed to the applicant’s physical address on file with the DRC until such time 
as the mediator expressly agrees in writing to accept service electronically and then 
notification shall be made to the applicant’s e-mail address on file with the DRC. 
 
(f) 
Investigation.  The QIC, after review of the information presented, 
may direct the DRC to retain the services of an investigator to assist the QIC in any 
of its functions.  The QIC, or any member or members thereof, may also conduct 
an investigation if authorized by the QIC chair.  Any investigation may include 
meeting with the applicant or any other person. 
 
(g) 
QIC Meeting with the Applicant.  Notwithstanding any other 
provision in this rule, at any time while the QIC has jurisdiction, it may meet with 
 
- 36 - 
the applicant in an effort to resolve the matter.  This resolution may include 
additional conditions to certification if agreed to by the applicant.  If additional 
conditions are accepted, all relevant documentation shall be forwarded to the DRC.  
These meetings may be in person, by teleconference, or other communication 
method at the discretion of the QIC.  
 
(h) 
Notice and Publication.  Any consensual resolution agreement with 
an applicant which includes sanctions shall be distributed by the DRC to all 
circuits and districts through the chief judges, all trial and appellate court 
administrators, the ADR directors, and mediation coordinators and published on 
the DRC page of the Florida Courts website with a summary of the case and a copy 
of the agreement. 
 
(i) 
Review.  If no other disposition has occurred, the QIC shall review all 
available information including the applicant’s response to a complaint, any 
investigative report, and any underlying documentation to determine whether there 
is probable cause to believe that the alleged conduct would constitute evidence of 
the applicant’s lack of good moral character. 
 
(j) 
No Probable Cause.  If the QIC finds no probable cause, it shall 
close the inquiry by dismissal and so advise the applicant in writing. 
 
(k) 
Probable Cause and Formal Charges.  If the QIC finds probable 
cause to believe the applicant lacks the good moral character necessary to be 
certified as a mediator, the QIC shall draft formal charges and forward such 
charges to the DRC for assignment to a panel.  The charges shall include a 
statement of the matters regarding the applicant’s lack of good moral character and 
references to the rules relating to those matters.  At the request of the QIC, the 
DRC may retain a member in good standing of The Florida Bar to conduct such 
additional investigation as necessary and to draft the formal charges for the QIC.  
The formal charges shall be signed by the chair, or, in the alternative, by the 
remaining 3 members of the QIC. 
 
(l) 
Withdrawal of Application.  A withdrawal of an application does 
not result in the loss of jurisdiction by the QIC. 
 
(m) 
Panel.  If a matter is referred to a panel under this section, the process 
shall proceed pursuant to rule 10.820. 
 
Committee Notes 
 
- 37 - 
 
2015 Revision.  A lack of good moral character may be determined not only by 1 
incident but also by the cumulative effect of many instances.  In reviewing an 
application for matters concerning the good moral character of any applicant, prior 
disciplinary actions against the applicant, from whatever source, should be 
provided to the QIC for their review and consideration.  
 
 
RULE 10.810. 
COMMITTEERULE VIOLATIONS COMPLAINT 
PROCESS 
 
(a) 
Initiation of Complaint.  Any individual wishing toor the DRC may 
make a complaint alleging that a mediator has violated one1 or more provisions of 
these rules shall do so in writing under oath.  The complaint from an individual 
shall be written, sworn to under oath and notarized using a form supplied by the 
DRC.  A complaint initiated by the DRC need not be sworn nor notarized but shall 
be signed by the director or the DRC staff attorney, if any.  The complaint shall 
state with particularity the specific facts and details that form the basis of the 
complaint. 
 
(b) 
Filing.  The complaint shall be filed with the centerDRC, or, in the 
alternative, the complaint may be filed in the office of the court administrator in 
the circuit in which the case originated or, if not case specific, in the circuit where 
the alleged misconduct occurred.  Once received by the DRC, the complaint shall 
be stamped with the date of receipt. 
 
(c) 
Referral.  The complaint, if filed in the office of the court 
administrator, shall be referred to the center within 5 days of filing. 
 
(d) 
Assignment to a Rules Violation Complaint Committee (RVCC).  
Upon receipt of a complaint in proper form, the centerDRC shall assign the 
complaint to a complaint committee or the qualifications complaint 
committeeRVCC within 10 daysa reasonable period of time.  The RVCC shall be 
informed by the DRC of the mediator’s prior disciplinary history.  As soon as 
practical after the receipt of a complaint from an individual, the DRC shall send a 
notification of the receipt of the complaint to the complainant. 
 
(e) 
Facial Sufficiency Determination.  The complaint committee or the 
qualifications complaint committee shall convene, either in person or by 
conference call, to determine whether the allegation(s), if true, would constitute a 
 
- 38 - 
violation of these rules. If the committee finds a complaint against a certified 
mediator to be facially insufficient, the complaint shall be dismissed without 
prejudice and the complainant and the mediator shall be so notified. If the 
qualifications complaint committee finds a complaint against an applicant to be 
facially insufficient, the complaint shall be dismissed and the application approved 
if all other requirements are met. If the complaint is found to be facially sufficient, 
the committee shall prepare a list of any rule or rules which may have been 
violated and shall submit such to the center. 
 
(d) 
Facial Sufficiency Determination.  The RVCC shall convene by 
conference call to determine whether the allegation(s), if true, would constitute a 
violation of these rules. 
 
(1) 
If the RVCC finds a complaint against a mediator to be facially 
insufficient, the complaint shall be dismissed without prejudice and the 
complainant shall be so notified and given an opportunity to re-file within a 20-day 
time period.  No complainant whose complaint is dismissed without prejudice 
pursuant to this section shall be permitted more than 1 additional filing to establish 
facial sufficiency. 
 
(2) 
If the complaint is found to be facially sufficient, the RVCC 
shall prepare a list of any rule or rules which may have been violated and shall 
submit same to the DRC. 
 
(f) 
Service.  The center shall serve a copy of the list of alleged rule 
violations prepared by the committee, a copy of the complaint, and a copy of these 
rules to the mediator or applicant in question. Service on the mediator or applicant 
shall be made by certified mail addressed to the mediator or applicant at the 
mediator's or applicant’s place of business or residence on file with the center. 
Mailing to such an address shall constitute service. 
 
(e) 
Service.  Upon the finding of facial sufficiency of a complaint, the 
DRC shall serve on the mediator a copy of the list of alleged rule violations, a copy 
of the complaint, and a link to an electronic copy of these rules or the rules which 
were in effect at the time of the alleged violation.  Service on the mediator shall be 
made either electronically or by certified mail addressed to the mediator’s physical 
or e-mail address on file with the DRC. 
 
(g) 
Response.  Within 20 days of the receipt of the list of violations 
prepared by the committee and the complaint, the mediator or applicant shall send 
 
- 39 - 
a written, sworn response to the center by registered or certified mail. If the 
mediator or applicant does not respond, the allegations shall be deemed admitted. 
 
(f) 
Response.  Within 20 days of the receipt of the list of alleged rule 
violations and the complaint, the mediator shall send a written, sworn under oath, 
and notarized response to the DRC by registered or certified mail.  Unless 
extended in writing by the DRC, if the mediator does not respond within the 20-
day time frame, the allegations shall be deemed admitted and the matter may be 
referred to a panel. 
 
(h) 
Preliminary Review.  Upon review of the complaint and the 
mediator’s or applicant’s response, the committee may find that no violation has 
occurred and dismiss the complaint. The committee may also resolve the issue 
pursuant to subdivision (j) of this rule. 
 
(i) 
Appointment of Investigator.  The committee, after review of the 
complaint and response, may direct the center to appoint an investigator to assist 
the committee in any of its functions. Such person shall investigate the complaint 
and advise the committee when it meets to determine the existence of probable 
cause. In the alternative to appointing an investigator, the committee or any 
member or members thereof may investigate the allegations, if so directed by the 
committee chair.  Such investigation may include meeting with the mediator, the 
applicant and the complainant. 
 
(j) 
Committee Meeting with the Mediator or Applicant.  
Notwithstanding any other provision in this rule, at any time while the committee 
has jurisdiction, it may meet with the complainant and the mediator or applicant, 
jointly or separately, in an effort to resolve the matter. This resolution may include 
sanctions if agreed to by the mediator or applicant. If sanctions are accepted, all 
relevant documentation shall be forwarded to the center. Such conferences shall be 
in person, by video-conference or teleconference at the discretion of the 
committee. 
 
(g) 
Resignation of Certification.  A resignation of certification by a 
mediator after the filing of a complaint does not result in the loss of jurisdiction by 
the MQDRB. 
 
(h) 
Investigation.  The RVCC, after review of the complaint and 
response, may direct the DRC to appoint an investigator to assist the RVCC in any 
of its functions.  The RVCC, or any member or members thereof, may also conduct 
 
- 40 - 
an investigation if authorized by the RVCC chair.  Any investigation may include 
meeting with the mediator, the complainant or any other person. 
 
(i) 
RVCC Meeting with the Complainant and Mediator.  
Notwithstanding any other provision in this rule, at any time while the RVCC has 
jurisdiction, it may meet with the complainant and the mediator, jointly or 
separately, in an effort to resolve the matter.  This resolution may include sanctions 
as set forth in rule 10.840(a) if agreed to by the mediator.  If sanctions are 
accepted, all relevant documentation shall be forwarded to the DRC.  Such 
meetings may be in person, by teleconference, or other communication method, at 
the discretion of the RVCC. 
 
(j) 
Notice and Publication.  Any consensual resolution agreement which 
includes sanctions shall be distributed by the DRC to all circuits and districts 
through the chief judges, all trial and appellate court administrators, the ADR 
directors, and mediation coordinators and published on the DRC page of the 
Florida Courts website with a summary of the case, the rule or rules listed as 
violated, the circumstances surrounding the violation of the rules, and a copy of the 
agreement. 
 
(k) 
Review.  If no other disposition has occurred, the committeeRVCC 
shall review the complaint, the response, and any investigative report, including 
any underlying documentation, to determine whether there is probable cause to 
believe that the alleged misconduct occurred and would constitute a violation of 
the rules. 
 
(ll) 
No Probable Cause.  If the committeeRVCC finds no probable cause, 
it shall dismiss the complaint with prejudice and so advise the complainant and the 
mediator or applicant in writing.  Such decision shall be final. 
 
(m) 
Probable Cause Found.  If probable cause exists, the committee may 
draft formal charges and forward such charges to the center for assignment to a 
panel. In the alternative, the committee may decide not to pursue the case by filing 
a short and plain statement of the reason or reasons for non-referral and so advise 
the complainant and the mediator or applicant in writing.If the RVCC finds that 
probable cause exists, it may: 
 
(1) 
draft formal charges and forward such charges to the DRC for 
assignment to a panel; or 
 
 
- 41 - 
(2) 
decide not to proceed with the case by filing an Order of Non-
Referral containing a short and plain statement of the rules for which probable 
cause was found and the reason or reasons for non-referral, and so advise the 
complainant and the mediator in writing. 
 
(n) 
Formal Charges and Counsel.  If the committee refers a complaint 
to the center, the committee shall submit to the center formal charges which shall 
include a short and plain statement of the matters asserted in the complaint and 
references to the particular sections of the rules involved.If the RVCC finds 
probable cause that the mediator has violated 1 or more of these rules, the RVCC 
shall draft formal charges and forward such charges to the DRC for assignment to 
a panel.  The charges shall include a statement of the matters asserted in the 
complaint relevant to the finding of rules violations, any additional information 
relevant to the finding of rules violations, and references to the particular sections 
of the rules violated.  The formal charges shall be signed by the chair, or, in the 
alternative, by the other 2 members of the RVCC. After considering the 
circumstances of the complaint and the complexity of the issues to be heard, the 
committee may direct the center to appoint a member of The Florida Bar to 
investigate and prosecute the complaint. Such counsel may be the investigator 
appointed pursuant to this rule if such person is otherwise qualified.  At the request 
of the RVCC, the DRC may retain a member in good standing of The Florida Bar 
to conduct such additional investigation as necessary and draft the formal charges. 
 
(oo) 
Dismissal.  Upon the filing of a stipulation of dismissal signed by 
the complainant and the mediator, and with the concurrence of the complaint 
committeeRVCC, which may withhold concurrence, the actioncomplaint shall be 
dismissed with prejudice. If an application is withdrawn by the applicant, the 
complaint shall be dismissed with or without prejudice depending on the 
circumstances. 
 
 
RULE 10.820. HEARING PANEL PROCEDURES 
 
(a) 
Assignment to PanelNotification of Formal Charges.  Upon referral 
of a complaint and formal charges from a committee, the center shall assign the 
complaint and formal charges or other matter to a panel for hearing, with notice of 
assignment to the complainant and the mediator or applicant. No member of the 
committee shall serve as a member of the panel.Upon the referral of formal 
charges to the DRC from a RVCC or QIC, the DRC shall promptly send a copy of 
 
- 42 - 
the formal charges to the mediator or applicant and complainant, if any, by 
certified mail, return receipt requested. 
 
(b) 
Hearing.  The center shall schedule a hearing not more than 90 days 
nor less than 30 days from the date of notice of assignment of the matter to the 
panel. At any time prior to the hearing, the panel may accept an admission to any 
or all charges and impose sanctions upon the mediator. The panel shall not be 
required to physically meet in person to accept such admission.Prosecutor.  Upon 
the referral of formal charges, the DRC shall retain the services of a member in 
good standing of The Florida Bar to prosecute the case. 
 
(c) 
Dismissal.  Upon the filing of a stipulation of dismissal signed by the 
complainant and the mediator, and with the concurrence of the panel, a complaint 
shall be dismissed.Panel Adviser.  After the referral of formal charges, the DRC 
may retain the services of a member in good standing of The Florida Bar to attend 
the hearing and advise and assist the panel on procedural and administrative 
matters. 
 
(d) Procedures for Hearing.  The procedures for hearing shall be as 
follows:  
 
(1) No hearing shall be conducted without 5 panel members being 
physically present. 
 
(2) The hearing may be conducted informally but with decorum. 
 
(3) The rules of evidence applicable to trial of civil actions apply but 
are to be liberally construed. 
 
(4) 
Upon a showing of good cause to the panel, testimony of any 
party or witness may be presented over the telephone.Assignment to Panel.  After 
the referral of formal charges to the DRC, the DRC shall send to the complainant, 
if any, and the mediator or applicant a Notice of Assignment of the case to a panel.  
No member of the RVCC or QIC that referred the formal charges shall serve as a 
member of the panel. 
 
(e) 
Right to Defend.  A mediator or applicant shall have the right to 
defend against all charges and shall have the right to be represented by an attorney, 
to examine and cross-examine witnesses, to compel the attendance of witnesses to 
testify, and to compel the production of documents and other evidentiary matter 
 
- 43 - 
through the subpoena power of the panel.Assignment of Related Cases.  If the 
DRC assigns related cases to a panel for a single hearing, any party to those cases 
may make a motion for severance which shall be heard by the chair of the panel. 
 
(f) 
Mediator or Applicant Discovery.  The center shall, upon written 
demand of a mediator, applicant, or counsel of record, promptly furnish the 
following: the names and addresses of all witnesses whose testimony is expected to 
be offered at the hearing, together with copies of all written statements and 
transcripts of the testimony of such witnesses in the possession of the counsel or 
the center which are relevant to the subject matter of the hearing and which have 
not previously been furnished.Time of the Hearing.  Absent stipulation of the 
parties or good cause, the DRC shall set the hearing for a date not more than 120 
days nor less than 30 days from the date of the notice of assignment of the case to 
the panel.  Within 10 days of the scheduling of the hearing, a notice of hearing 
shall be sent by certified mail to the mediator or applicant and his or her attorney, 
if any. 
 
(g) 
Panel Discovery.  The mediator, applicant, or counsel of record shall, 
upon written demand of the counsel or the center, promptly furnish the following:  
the names and addresses of all witnesses whose testimony is expected to be offered 
at the hearing, together with copies of all written statements and transcripts of the 
testimony of such witnesses in the possession of the mediator, applicant, or counsel 
of record which are relevant to the subject matter of the hearing and which have 
not previously been furnished.Admission to Charges.  At any time prior to the 
hearing, the panel may accept an admission to any or all charges and impose 
sanctions upon the mediator or applicant.  The panel shall not be required to meet 
in person to accept any such admission and imposition of sanctions. 
 
(h) 
Failure to Appear.  Absent a showing of good cause, if the 
complainant fails to appear at the hearing, the panel may dismiss a complaint for 
want of prosecution.Dismissal by Stipulation.  Upon the filing of a stipulation of 
dismissal signed by the complainant, if any, the mediator or applicant, and the 
prosecutor and with the review and concurrence of the panel, which concurrence 
may be withheld, the case shall be dismissed with prejudice.  Upon dismissal, the 
panel shall promptly forward a copy of the dismissal order to the DRC. 
 
(i) 
Mediator’s or Applicant’s Absence.  If the mediator or applicant 
fails to appear, absent a showing of good cause, the hearing shall 
proceed.Procedures for Hearing.  The procedures for a hearing shall be as 
follows: 
 
- 44 - 
 
(1) 
Panel Presence.  No hearing shall be conducted without the 
chair being physically present.  All other panel members must be physically 
present unless the chair determines that exceptional circumstances are shown to 
exist which include, but are not limited to, unexpected illness, unexpected 
incapacity, or unforeseeable and unavoidable absence of a panel member.  Upon 
such determination, the hearing may proceed with no fewer than 4 panel members, 
of which 1 is the chair.  In the event only 4 of the panel members are present, at 
least 3 members of the panel must agree on the decisions of the panel.  If 3 
members of the panel cannot agree on the decision, the hearing shall be 
rescheduled. 
 
(2) 
Decorum.  The hearing may be conducted informally but with 
decorum. 
 
(3) 
Oath.  Anyone testifying in the hearing shall swear or affirm to 
tell the truth.   
 
(4) 
Florida Evidence Code.  The rules of evidence applicable to 
trials of civil actions shall apply but are to be liberally construed. 
 
(5) 
Testimony.  Testimony at the hearing may be given through the 
use of telephonic or other communication equipment upon a showing of good 
cause to the chair of the panel within a reasonable time prior to the hearing. 
 
(6) 
Right to Defend.  A mediator or applicant shall have the right:  
to defend against all charges; to be represented by an attorney; to examine and 
cross-examine witnesses; to compel the attendance of witnesses to testify; and to 
compel the production of documents and other evidentiary matter through the 
subpoena power of the panel. 
 
(7) 
Mediator or Applicant Discovery.  The prosecutor shall, upon 
written demand of a mediator, applicant, or counsel of record, promptly furnish the 
following:  the names and addresses of all witnesses whose testimony is expected 
to be offered at the hearing; copies of all written statements and transcripts of the 
testimony of such witnesses in the possession of the prosecutor or the DRC which 
are relevant to the subject matter of the hearing and which have not previously 
been furnished; and copies of any exhibits which are expected to be offered at the 
hearing. 
 
 
- 45 - 
(8) 
Prosecutor Discovery.  The mediator, applicant, or their 
counsel of record shall, upon written demand of the prosecutor, promptly furnish 
the following:  the names and addresses of all witnesses whose testimony is 
expected to be offered at the hearing; copies of all written statements and 
transcripts of the testimony of such witnesses in the possession of the mediator, 
applicant or their counsel of record which are relevant to the subject matter of the 
hearing and which have not previously been furnished; and copies of any exhibits 
which are expected to be offered at the hearing. 
 
(9) 
Complainant’s Failure to Appear.  Absent a showing of good 
cause, if the complainant fails to appear at the hearing, the panel may dismiss the 
case.  
 
(10) Mediator’s or Applicant’s Failure to Appear.  If the 
mediator or applicant has failed to answer the underlying complaint or fails to 
appear, the panel may proceed with the hearing. 
 
(A) 
If the hearing is conducted in the absence of a mediator 
or applicant who failed to respond to the underlying complaint and the allegations 
were therefore admitted, no further notice to the mediator or applicant is necessary 
and the decision of the panel shall be final. 
 
(B) 
If the hearing is conducted in the absence of a mediator 
or applicant who submitted a response to the underlying complaint, the DRC shall 
notify the mediator or applicant that the hearing occurred and whether the matter 
was dismissed or if sanctions were imposed.  The mediator or applicant may 
petition for rehearing by showing good cause for such absence.  A petition for 
rehearing must be received by the DRC and the prosecutor no later than 10 days 
from receipt of the DRC notification.  The prosecutor shall file a response, if any, 
within 5 days from receipt of the petition for rehearing.  The disposition of the 
petition shall be decided solely by the chair of the panel and any hearing required 
by the chair of the panel may be conducted telephonically or by other 
communication equipment. 
 
(11) Reporting of Proceedings.  Any party shall have the right, 
without any order or approval, to have all or any portion of the testimony in the 
proceedings reported and transcribed by a court reporter at the party’s expense. 
 
(j) 
Rehearing.  If the matter is heard in the mediator’s or applicant’s 
absence, the mediator or applicant may petition for rehearing, for good cause, 
 
- 46 - 
within 10 days of the date of the hearing.Decision of Panel.  Upon making a 
determination that the case shall be dismissed or that the imposition of sanctions or 
denial of application is appropriate, the panel shall promptly notify the DRC of the 
decision including factual findings and conclusions signed by the chair of the 
panel.  The DRC shall thereafter promptly mail a copy of the decision to all parties. 
 
(k) 
Recording.  Any party shall have the right, without any order or 
approval, to have all or any portion of the testimony in the proceedings reported 
and transcribed by a court reporter at the party’s expense.Notice to Circuits and 
Districts.  In every case  in which a mediator or applicant has had sanctions 
imposed by agreement or decision, such agreement or decision shall be sent by the 
DRC to all circuits and districts through the chief judges, all trial and appellate 
court administrators, the ADR directors, and mediation coordinators. 
 
(ll) 
Dismissal.  Upon dismissal, the panel shall promptly file a copy of the 
dismissal order with the center.Publication.  Upon the imposition of sanctions, 
whether by consent of the mediator or applicant and approval by the panel or by 
decision of the panel after a hearing, the DRC shall publish the name of the 
mediator or applicant, a summary of the case, a list of the rule or rules which were 
violated, the circumstances surrounding the violation, and a copy of the decision of 
the panel.  Such publication shall be on the DRC page of the Florida Courts 
website and in any outside publication at the discretion of the DRC Director. 
 
(m) 
Sanctions.  If, after the hearing, a majority of the panel finds that 
there is clear and convincing evidence to support a violation of the rules, the panel 
shall impose such sanctions included in rule 10.830 as it deems appropriate and 
report such action to the center. 
 
(n) 
Denial of Application for Certification.  If, after a hearing, a 
majority of the panel finds by the preponderance of the evidence that an applicant 
should not be certified as a mediator, the panel shall deny the application and 
report such action to the center. 
 
 
RULE 10.830. 
SANCTIONSBURDEN OF PROOF 
 
(a) Generally.  The panel may impose one or more of the following 
sanctions: 
 
(1) Imposition of costs of the proceeding.  
 
 
- 47 - 
 
(2) Oral admonishment. 
 
(3) Written reprimand. 
 
(4) Additional training, which may include the observation of 
mediations. 
 
(5) Restriction on types of cases which can be mediated in the future. 
 
(6) Suspension for a period of up to 1 year. 
 
(7) Decertification or, if the mediator is not certified, bar from 
service as a mediator under Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. 
 
(8) Such other sanctions as are agreed to by the mediator and the 
panel. 
 
(b) Conviction of Felony.  If the panel finds that a certified mediator has a 
felony conviction, it shall decertify the mediator for a period of not less than two 
years or until restoration of civil rights, whichever comes later. In order to become 
a reinstated, such decertified mediator must comply with the requirements of 
subdivision (h).  
 
(c) Failure to Comply.  If there is reason to believe that the mediator 
failed to timely comply with any imposed sanction, a hearing shall be held before a 
panel convened for that purpose within 60 days of the date when the center learned 
of the alleged failure to comply. The hearing shall also include any additional 
alleged failures to comply of which the center becomes aware prior to the date of 
the hearing. The holding of a hearing shall not preclude a subsequent hearing on an 
alleged failure occurring after the first alleged failure. Any suspension in effect at 
the time of discovery of the violation by the center shall continue in effect until a 
decision is reached at the hearing. A finding of the panel that there was a willful 
failure to substantially comply with any imposed sanction shall result in the 
decertification of the mediator. 
 
(d) Decertified Mediators.  If a mediator has been decertified or barred 
from service pursuant to these rules, the mediator shall not thereafter be certified or 
assigned to mediate a case pursuant to court rule or be designated as mediator 
pursuant to court rule unless reinstated. 
 
- 48 - 
 
(e)  Decision to be Filed.  Upon making a determination that discipline is 
appropriate, the panel shall promptly file with the center a copy of the decision 
including findings and conclusions certified by the chair of the panel. The center 
shall promptly mail to all parties notice of such filing, together with a copy of the 
decision. 
 
(f) Notice to Circuits.  The center shall notify all circuits of any mediator 
who has been decertified or suspended unless otherwise ordered by the Supreme 
Court of Florida. 
 
(g) Publication.  Upon the imposition of sanctions, the center shall publish 
the name of the mediator, a short summary of the rule or rules which were violated, 
the circumstances surrounding the violation, and any sanctions imposed. 
 
 
(h) 
Reinstatement After Suspension.  Except if inconsistent with rule 
10.110, a mediator who has been suspended shall be reinstated as a certified 
mediator upon the expiration of the imposed or accepted suspension period and 
satisfaction of any additional renewal obligations.  
 
(i) 
Reinstatement After Decertification.  Except if inconsistent with 
rule 10.110, a mediator who has been decertified may be reinstated as a certified 
mediator. Except as otherwise provided in the decision of the panel, no application 
for reinstatement may be tendered within 2 years after the date of 
decertification. The reinstatement procedures shall be as follows: 
 
(1) 
A petition for reinstatement, together with 6 copies, shall be 
made in writing, verified by the petitioner, and filed with the center. 
 
(2) 
The petition for reinstatement shall contain: 
 
(A) 
the name, age, residence, and address of the petitioner; 
 
(B) 
the offense or misconduct upon which the  decertification 
was based, together with the date of such decertification; and 
 
(C) 
a concise statement of facts claimed to justify 
reinstatement as a certified mediator. 
 
 
- 49 - 
(3) 
The center shall refer the petition for reinstatement to a hearing 
panel in the appropriate division for review.  
 
(4) 
The panel shall review the petition and, if the petitioner is 
found to be unfit to mediate, the petition shall be dismissed. If the petitioner is 
found fit to mediate, the panel shall notify the center and the center shall reinstate 
the petitioner as a certified mediator contingent on the petitioner’s completion of a 
certified mediation training program of the type for which the petitioner seeks to be 
reinstated. Successive petitions for reinstatement based upon the same grounds 
may be reviewed without a hearing. 
(a) 
Rule Violation.  The burden of proof for rule violations other than 
good moral character is clear and convincing evidence. 
 
(b) 
Good Moral Character.  The burden of proof for any good moral 
character issue is the preponderance of the evidence. 
 
 
RULE 10.840. 
SUBPOENASSANCTIONS 
 
(a) Issuance.  Subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the 
production of documentary evidence for discovery and for the appearance of any 
person before a complaint committee, a panel, or any member thereof, may be 
issued by the chair of the complaint committee or panel or, if the chair of the panel 
is absent, by the vice-chair. Such subpoenas may be served in any manner provided 
by law for the service of witness subpoenas in a civil action. 
 
(b) 
Failure to Obey.  Any person who, without adequate excuse, fails to 
obey a duly served subpoena may be cited for contempt of the committee or panel 
in accordance with rule 10.740. 
(a) 
Generally.  The mediator or applicant may be sanctioned pursuant to 
the following: 
 
(1) 
by agreement with a RVCC or QIC; 
 
(2) 
by agreement with a panel to the imposition of sanctions; or 
 
(3) 
by imposition of sanctions by a panel as a result of their 
deliberations. 
 
 
- 50 - 
(b) 
Types of Sanctions.  Sanctions may include 1 or more of the 
following: 
 
(1) 
denial of an application; 
 
(2) 
oral admonishment; 
 
(3) 
written reprimand; 
 
(4) 
additional training, which may include the observation of 
mediations; 
 
(5) 
restriction on types of cases which can be mediated in the 
future; 
 
(6) 
supervised mediation; 
 
(7) 
suspension for a period of up to 1 year; 
 
(8) 
decertification or, if the mediator is not certified, bar from 
service as a mediator under any rule of court or statute pertaining to certified or 
court-appointed mediators; 
 
(9) 
costs incurred prior to, during, and subsequent to the hearing.  
The specific categories and amounts of such costs are to be decided by the chair of 
the panel upon submission of costs by the DRC or the prosecutor, and shall include 
only: 
 
(A) 
all travel expenses for members of the panel; 
 
(B) 
all travel expenses for witnesses, prosecutor, panel 
adviser, and DRC Director or designee; 
 
(C) 
court reporter fees and transcription; 
 
(D) 
fees and costs for all investigation services; 
 
(E) 
telephone/conference call charges; 
 
(F) 
postage and delivery; 
 
- 51 - 
 
(G) 
notary charges; 
 
(H) 
interpretation and translation services; and 
 
(I) 
copy costs. 
 
(10) any other sanctions as deemed appropriate by the panel. 
 
(c) 
Failure to Comply With Sanctions. 
 
(1) 
If there is a reasonable belief that a mediator or applicant failed 
to comply with any sanction, unless otherwise provided for in the agreement with a 
RVCC or QIC or the decision of the panel, the DRC may file a motion for 
contempt with the Contempt/Disqualification Judge of the division in which the 
sanctions were agreed to or imposed and serve the mediator or applicant with a 
copy of the motion.  
 
(2) 
The mediator or applicant shall file a response within 20 days 
of receipt of the motion for contempt.  
 
(3) 
If no response is filed, the allegations of the motion are 
admitted. 
 
(4) 
The DRC shall thereafter set a hearing with the 
Contempt/Disqualification Judge and provide notice to the mediator or applicant.  
The holding of a hearing shall not preclude subsequent hearings on any other 
alleged failure.   
 
(5) 
Any sanction in effect at the time that the DRC has a reasonable 
belief that a violation of the sanctions has occurred shall continue in effect until a 
decision is reached by the Contempt/Disqualification Judge.  
 
(6) 
A finding by the Contempt/Disqualification Judge that there 
was a willful failure to substantially comply with any imposed or agreed-to 
sanction shall result in the automatic decertification of the mediator for no less than 
2 years after which the mediator shall be required to apply as a new applicant. 
 
 
 
- 52 - 
RULE 10.850. 
CONFIDENTIALITYSUSPENSION, 
DECERTIFICATION, DENIAL OF APPLICATION, AND 
REMOVAL 
 
(a) Generally.  Until sanctions are imposed, whether by the panel or upon 
agreement of the mediator, all proceedings shall be confidential. After sanctions 
are imposed by a panel or an application is denied, all documentation including 
and subsequent to the filing of formal charges shall be public with the exception of 
those matters which are otherwise confidential under law or rule of the supreme 
court, regardless of the outcome of any appeal. If a consensual agreement is 
reached between a mediator and a complaint committee, only the basis of the 
complaint and the agreement shall be released to the public. 
 
(b) Witnesses.  Each witness in every proceeding under these disciplinary 
rules shall be sworn to tell the truth and not disclose the existence of the 
proceeding, the subject matter thereof, or the identity of the mediator until the 
proceeding is no longer confidential under these disciplinary rules. Violation of 
this oath shall be considered an act of contempt of the complaint committee or the 
panel. 
 
(c) Papers to be Marked.  All notices, papers, and pleadings mailed prior 
to formal charges being filed shall be enclosed in a cover marked “confidential.” 
 
(d) Breach of Confidentiality.  Violation of confidentiality by a member 
of the board shall subject the member to removal by the chief justice of the 
Supreme Court of Florida. 
 
Committee Notes 
 
1995 Revision:  The Committee believed the rule regarding confidentiality should 
be amended in deference to the 1993 amendment to section 44.102, Florida 
Statutes, that engrafted an exception to the general confidentiality requirement for 
all mediation sessions for the purpose of investigating complaints filed against 
mediators. Section 44.102(4) specifically provides that “the disclosure of an 
otherwise privileged communication shall be used only for the internal use of the 
body conducting the investigation” and that “[Prior] to the release of any 
disciplinary files to the public, all references to otherwise privileged 
communications shall be deleted from the record.” 
 
 
 
- 53 - 
 
These provisions created a substantial potential problem when read in 
conjunction with the previous rule on confidentiality, which made public all 
proceedings after formal charges were filed. In addition to the possibly substantial 
burden of redacting the files for public release, there was the potentially greater 
problem of conducting panel hearings in such a manner as to preclude the 
possibility that confidential communications would be revealed during testimony, 
specifically the possibility that any public observers would have to be removed 
prior to the elicitation of any such communication only to be allowed to return 
until the next potentially confidential revelation. The Committee believes that 
under the amended rule the integrity of the disciplinary system can be maintained 
by releasing the results of any disciplinary action together with a redacted 
transcript of panel proceedings, while still maintaining the integrity of the 
mediation process. 
 
 
2008 Revision.  The recent adoption of the Florida Mediation Confidentiality 
and Privilege Act, sections 44.401 - 44.406, Florida Statutes, renders the first 
paragraph of the 1995 Revision Committee Notes inoperative.  The second 
paragraph explains the initial rationale for the rule, which is useful now from a 
historical standpoint. 
(a) 
Suspension.  During the period of suspension, compliance with all 
requirements for certification must be met including, but not limited to, submittal 
of renewal application, fees and continuing education requirements. 
 
(b) 
Reinstatement After Suspension.  A mediator who has been 
suspended shall be reinstated as a certified mediator, unless otherwise ineligible, 
upon the expiration of the suspension period and satisfaction of any additional 
obligations contained in the sanction document. 
 
(c) 
Automatic Decertification or Automatic Denial of Application.  A 
mediator or applicant shall automatically be decertified or denied application 
approval without the need for a hearing upon the following:  
 
(1) 
Conviction of Felony of Certified Mediator.  If the DRC 
finds that a certified mediator has a felony conviction, the mediator shall 
automatically be decertified from all certifications and notification and publication 
of such decertification shall proceed pursuant to rule 10.820(j) and (k).  The 
decertified mediator may not apply for any certification for a period of 2 years or 
until restoration of civil rights, whichever comes later.   
 
 
- 54 - 
(2) 
Conviction of Felony of Applicant.  If the DRC finds that an 
applicant for certification has a felony conviction and has not had civil rights 
restored, the application shall be automatically denied and may not be resubmitted 
for consideration until restoration of civil rights.  
 
(3) 
Revocation of Professional License of Certified Mediator.  If 
the DRC finds that a certified mediator has been disbarred from any state or federal 
bar or has had any professional license revoked, the mediator shall be 
automatically decertified and cannot reapply for certification for a period of 2 
years. 
 
(4) 
Revocation of Professional License of Applicant.  If the DRC 
finds that an applicant for certification has been disbarred from any state or federal 
bar or has had any professional license revoked, the applicant shall be 
automatically denied approval and cannot reapply for certification for a period of 2 
years. 
 
(5) 
Notification and Publication.  In the event of an automatic 
denial of an application or decertification, the DRC shall follow all procedures for 
notification and publication as stated in rule 10.820(k) and (l). 
 
(d) 
Decertified Mediators.  If a mediator or applicant has been 
decertified or barred from service pursuant to these rules, the mediator or applicant 
shall not thereafter be assigned or appointed to mediate a case pursuant to court 
rule or order or be designated as a mediator by the parties in any court proceeding. 
 
(e) 
Removal From Supreme Court Committees.  If a member of the 
MQDRB, the ADR Rules and Policy Committee, the Mediator Ethics Advisory 
Committee, the Mediator Training Review Board, or any supreme court committee 
related to alternative dispute resolution processes established in the future, is 
disciplined, suspended, or decertified, the DRC shall immediately remove that 
member from the committee or board on which the member serves. 
 
(f) 
Reinstatement After Decertification. 
 
(1) 
Except if inconsistent with rule 10.110, or subdivision (b) of 
this rule, a mediator who has been decertified may be reinstated as a certified 
mediator after application unless the document decertifying the mediator states 
otherwise. 
 
 
- 55 - 
(2) 
Unless a greater time period has been imposed by a panel or 
rule, no application for reinstatement may be submitted prior to 1 year after the 
date of decertification. 
 
(3) 
The reinstatement procedures shall be as follows: 
 
(A) 
A petition for reinstatement shall be made in writing, 
sworn to by the petitioner, notarized under oath, and filed with the DRC. 
 
(B) 
The petition shall contain: 
 
(i)  a new and current application for mediator 
certification along with required fees; 
 
(ii)  a description of the offense or misconduct upon 
which the decertification was based, together with the date of such decertification 
and the case number; 
 
(iii)  a copy of the sanction document decertifying the 
mediator; 
 
(iv)  a statement of facts claimed to justify reinstatement 
as a certified mediator; and 
 
(v)  if the period of decertification is 2 years or more, the 
petitioner shall complete a certified mediation training program of the type for 
which the petitioner seeks to be reinstated and complete all mentorship and other 
requirements in effect at the time. 
 
(C) 
The DRC shall refer the petition for reinstatement to the 
current QIC.  
 
(D) 
The QIC shall review the petition for reinstatement.  If 
there are no matters which make the mediator otherwise ineligible and if the 
petitioner is found to have met the requirements for certification, the QIC shall 
notify the DRC and the DRC shall reinstate the petitioner as a certified mediator.  
However, if the decertification was for 2 or more years, reinstatement shall be 
contingent on the petitioner’s completion of a certified mediation training program 
of the type for which the petitioner seeks to be reinstated. 
 
 
- 56 - 
 
RULE 10.860. 
INTERESTED PARTYSUBPOENAS 
 
A mediator is disqualified from serving on a committee or panel proceeding 
involving the mediator’s own discipline or decertification. 
(a) 
RVCC or QIC.  Subpoenas for the production of documents or other 
evidence and for the appearance of any person before a RVCC or QIC, or any 
member thereof, may be issued by the chair of the RVCC or QIC.  If the chair is 
unavailable, the subpoena may be issued by the remaining members of the RVCC 
or QIC.  
 
(b) 
Panel.  Subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the production 
of documents or other evidence before a panel may be issued by the chair of the 
panel.  If the chair of a panel is unavailable, the subpoena may be issued by the 
vice-chair. 
 
(c) 
Service.  Subpoenas may be served in any manner provided by law 
for the service of witness subpoenas in a civil action. 
 
(d) 
Failure to Obey.  Any person who, without good cause shown, fails 
to obey a duly served subpoena may be cited for contempt in accordance with rule 
10.750. 
 
 
RULE 10.870. 
DISQUALIFICATION OF MEMBERS OF A PANEL OR 
COMMITTEECONFIDENTIALITY 
 
(a) Procedure.  In any case, any party may at any time before final 
disciplinary action show by a suggestion filed in the case that a member of the 
board before which the case is pending, or some person related to that member, is a 
party to the case or is interested in the result of the case or that the member is 
related to an attorney or counselor of record in the case or that the member is a 
material witness for or against one of the parties to the case.   
 
(b) Facts to be Alleged.  A motion to disqualify shall allege the facts relied 
on to show the grounds for disqualification and shall be verified by the party. 
 
(c) Time for Motion.  A motion to disqualify shall be made within a 
reasonable time after discovery of the facts constituting grounds for 
disqualification. 
 
- 57 - 
 
(d) Action by Chair.  The chair of the appropriate committee or panel shall 
determine only the legal sufficiency of the motion. The chair shall not pass on the 
truth of the facts alleged. If the motion is legally sufficient, the chair shall enter an 
order of disqualification and the disqualified committee or panel member shall 
proceed no further in the action. In the event that the chair is the challenged 
member, the vice-chair shall perform the acts required under this subdivision. 
 
(e) Recusals.  Nothing in this rule limits a board member’s authority to 
enter an order of recusal on the board member’s own initiative. 
 
(f) Replacement.  The center shall assign a board member to take the 
place of any disqualified or recused member. 
 
(g) 
Qualifications.  Each assignee shall have the same qualifications as 
the disqualified or recused member. 
(a) 
Generally.  Until the finding of probable cause, all communications 
and proceedings shall be confidential.  Upon the filing of formal charges, the 
formal charges and all documents created subsequent to the filing of formal 
charges shall be public with the exception of those matters which are otherwise 
confidential under law or rule of the supreme court, regardless of the outcome of 
any appeal.  If a consensual agreement is reached between a mediator or applicant 
and a RVCC or QIC, only a summary of the allegations and a link or copy of the 
agreement may be released to the public and placed on the DRC page of the 
Florida Courts website.   
 
(b) 
Breach of Confidentiality.  Violation of confidentiality by a member 
of the MQDRB shall subject the member to discipline under these rules and 
removal from the MQDRB by the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Florida.   
 
Committee Notes 
 
 
1995 Revision.  The Committee believed the rule regarding confidentiality 
should be amended in deference to the 1993 amendment to section 44.102, Florida 
Statutes, that engrafted an exception to the general confidentiality requirement for 
all mediation sessions for the purpose of investigating complaints filed against 
mediators.  Section 44.102(4) specifically provides that “the disclosure of an 
otherwise privileged communication shall be used only for the internal use of the 
body conducting the investigation” and that “[Prior] to the release of any 
 
- 58 - 
disciplinary files to the public, all references to otherwise privileged 
communications shall be deleted from the record.” 
 
 
These provisions created a substantial potential problem when read in 
conjunction with the previous rule on confidentiality, which made public all 
proceedings after formal charges were filed.  In addition to the possibly substantial 
burden of redacting the files for public release, there was the potentially greater 
problem of conducting panel hearings in such a manner as to preclude the 
possibility that confidential communications would be revealed during testimony, 
specifically the possibility that any public observers would have to be removed 
prior to the elicitation of any such communication only to be allowed to return 
until the next potentially confidential revelation.  The Committee believes that 
under the amended rule the integrity of the disciplinary system can be maintained 
by releasing the results of any disciplinary action together with a redacted 
transcript of panel proceedings, while still maintaining the integrity of the 
mediation process. 
 
 
2008 Revision.  The recent adoption of the Florida Mediation Confidentiality 
and Privilege Act, sections 44.401 - 44.406, Florida Statutes, renders the first 
paragraph of the 1995 Revision Committee Notes inoperative.  The second 
paragraph explains the initial rationale for the rule, which is useful now from a 
historical standpoint. 
 
 
RULE 10.880. 
SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE 
REVIEWDISQUALIFICATION AND REMOVAL OF 
MEMBERS OF A COMMITTEE, PANEL OR THE 
BOARD 
 
(a) Right of Review.  Any mediator or applicant found to have committed 
a violation of these rules or otherwise sanctioned by a hearing panel shall have a 
right of review of that action. Review of this type shall be by the chief justice of 
the Supreme Court of Florida or by the chief justice’s designee. A mediator shall 
have no right of review of any resolution reached under rule 10.810(j). 
 
(b) Rules of Procedure.  The Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, to the 
extent applicable and except as otherwise provided in this rule, shall control all 
appeals of mediator disciplinary matters.  
 
 
(1) 
The jurisdiction to seek review of disciplinary action shall be 
 
- 59 - 
invoked by submitting an original and one copy of a Notice of Review of Mediator 
Disciplinary Action to the chief justice within 30 days of the panel’s decision. A 
copy shall also be provided to the Center. 
 
(2) 
The notice of review shall be substantially in the form 
prescribed by rule 9.900(a), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. A copy of the 
panel decision shall be attached to the notice. 
 
(3) 
Appellant’s initial brief, accompanied by an appendix as 
prescribed by rule 9.220, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, shall be served 
within 30 days of submitting the notice of review. Additional briefs shall be served 
as prescribed by rule 9.210, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. 
 
(c) 
Standard of Review.  The review shall be conducted in accordance 
with the following standard of review: 
 
(1) 
The chief justice or designee shall review the findings and 
conclusions of the panel using a competent substantial evidence standard, neither 
reweighing the evidence in the record nor substituting the reviewer’s judgment for 
that of the panel. 
 
(2) 
Decisions of the chief justice or designee shall be final upon 
issuance of a mandate under rule 9.340, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. 
(a) 
Disqualification of Member.  A member of the MQDRB is 
disqualified from serving on a RVCC, QIC or panel involving that member’s own 
discipline or decertification. 
 
(b) 
Party Request for Disqualification of a MQDRB Member.  Any 
party may move to disqualify a member of the committee or panel before which 
the case is pending.  Factors to be considered include, but are not limited to: 
 
(1) 
the member or some person related to that member is interested 
in the result of the case; 
 
(2) 
the member is related to an attorney or counselor of record in 
the case; or 
 
(3) 
the member is a material witness for or against 1 of the parties 
to the case. 
 
 
- 60 - 
(c) 
Facts to Be Alleged.  Any motion to disqualify shall be in writing, 
allege the facts relied on to show the grounds for disqualification and shall be 
made under oath by the moving party. 
 
(d) 
Time for Motion.  A party shall file a motion to disqualify with the 
DRC not later than 10 days after the movant discovered or reasonably should have 
discovered the facts which would constitute grounds for disqualification. 
 
(e) 
Action by Contempt/Disqualification Judge.  One of the 
Contempt/Disqualification Judges shall rule on any motions for disqualification.  
 
(f) 
Board Member Initiative.  A member of any committee or panel 
may disqualify him/herself on the member’s own initiative at any time. 
 
(g) 
Replacement.  Depending on the circumstances, the DRC may 
replace any disqualified member. 
 
(h) 
Qualifications for New Member.  Each new member serving as a 
replacement shall have the same qualifications as the disqualified member, but, if 
needed, may be chosen from a different division of the MQDRB. 
 
 
RULE 10.890. 
LIMITATION ON TIME TO INITIATE A COMPLAINT 
 
(a) 
Rule Violations.  Except as otherwise provided in this rule, 
complaints alleging violations of the Florida Rules for Certified and Court-
Appointed Mediators shall not be filed later than 2 years after the date on which 
the party had a reasonable opportunity to discover the violation, but in no case 
more than 4 years after the date of the violation. 
 
(b) 
Felonies.  There shall be no limit on the time in which to file a 
complaint alleging a conviction of a felony by an applicant or mediator.  
 
(c) 
Good Moral Character.  A complaint alleging lack of good moral 
character in connection with an application under these rules shall not be filed later 
than 4 years after the date of the discovery by the DRC of the matter(s) evidencing 
a lack of good moral character. 
 
 
 
- 61 - 
RULE 10.900. 
MEDIATOR ETHICS ADVISORY 
COMMITTEESUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE 
REVIEW 
 
(a) 
Scope and Purpose.  The Mediator Ethics Advisory Committee shall 
provide written advisory opinions to mediators subject to these rules in response to 
ethical questions arising from the Standards of Professional Conduct. Such 
opinions shall be consistent with supreme court decisions on mediator discipline. 
 
(b) 
Appointment.  The Mediator Ethics Advisory Committee shall be 
composed of 9 members, 3 from each geographic division served by the Mediator 
Qualifications Board. No member of the Mediator Qualifications Board shall serve 
on the committee. 
 
(c) 
Membership and Terms.  The membership of the committee shall be 
composed of 1 county mediator, 1 family mediator, and 1 circuit mediator from 
each division and shall be appointed by the chief justice. At least one of the 9 
members shall also be a certified dependency mediator, and at least one of the 9 
members shall also be a certified appellate mediator. All appointments shall be for 
4 years. No member shall serve more than 2 consecutive terms. The committee 
shall select 1 member as chair and 1 member as vice-chair. 
 
(d) 
Meetings.  The committee shall meet in person or by telephone 
conference as necessary at the direction of the chair to consider requests for 
advisory opinions. A quorum shall consist of a majority of the members appointed 
to the committee. All requests for advisory opinions shall be in writing. The 
committee may vote by any means as directed by the chair. 
 
(e) 
Opinions..  Upon due deliberation, and upon the concurrence of a 
majority of the committee, the committee shall render opinions. A majority of all 
members shall be required to concur in any advisory opinion issued by the 
committee. The opinions shall be signed by the chair, or vice-chair in the absence 
of the chair, filed with the Dispute Resolution Center, published in the Dispute 
Resolution Center newsletter, and be made available upon request. 
 
(f) 
Effect of Opinions.  While reliance by a mediator on an opinion of 
the committee shall not constitute a defense in any disciplinary proceeding, it shall 
be evidence of good faith and may be considered by the board in relation to any 
determination of guilt or in mitigation of punishment.   
 
 
- 62 - 
(g) 
Confidentiality.  Prior to publication, all references to the requesting 
mediator or any other real person, firm, organization, or corporation shall be 
deleted from any request for an opinion, any document associated with the 
preparation of an opinion, and any opinion issued by the committee. This rule shall 
apply to all opinions, past and future. 
 
(h) 
Support.  The Dispute Resolution Center shall provide all support 
necessary for the committee to fulfill its duties under these rules. 
 
Committee Notes 
 
2000 Revision.  The Mediator Ethics Advisory Committee was formerly the 
Mediator Qualifications Advisory Panel. 
(a) 
Right of Review.  Any mediator or applicant found to have 
committed a violation of these rules or otherwise sanctioned by a hearing panel 
shall have a right of review of that action.  Review of this type shall be by the chief 
justice of the Supreme Court of Florida or by the chief justice’s designee.  A 
mediator shall have no right of review of any resolution reached under rule 
10.800(g) and 10.810(i). 
 
(b) 
Rules of Procedure.  The Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, to 
the extent applicable and except as otherwise provided in this rule, shall control all 
appeals of mediator disciplinary matters.  
 
(1) 
The jurisdiction to seek review of disciplinary action shall be 
invoked by submitting an original and 1 copy of a Notice of Review of Mediator 
Disciplinary Action to the chief justice within 30 days of the panel’s decision.  A 
copy shall also be provided to the DRC. 
 
(2) 
The notice of review shall be substantially in the form 
prescribed by rule 9.900(a), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure.  A copy of the 
panel decision shall be attached to the notice. 
 
(3) 
Appellant’s initial brief, accompanied by an appendix as 
prescribed by rule 9.210, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, shall be served 
within 30 days of submitting the notice of review.  Additional briefs shall be 
served as prescribed by rule 9.210, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. 
 
(c) 
Standard of Review.  The review shall be conducted in accordance 
with the following standard of review: 
 
- 63 - 
 
(1) 
The chief justice or designee shall review the findings and 
conclusions of the panel using a competent substantial evidence standard, neither 
reweighing the evidence in the record nor substituting the reviewer’s judgment for 
that of the panel. 
 
(2) 
Decisions of the chief justice or designee shall be final upon 
issuance of a mandate under rule 9.340, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. 
 
 
RULE 10.910. 
MEDIATOR ETHICS ADVISORY COMMITTEE  
 
(a) 
Scope and Purpose.  The Mediator Ethics Advisory Committee shall 
provide written advisory opinions to mediators subject to these rules in response to 
ethical questions arising from the Standards of Professional Conduct.  Such 
opinions shall be consistent with supreme court decisions on mediator discipline. 
 
(b) 
Appointment.  The Mediator Ethics Advisory Committee shall be 
composed of 9 members, 3 from each geographic division served by the Mediator 
Qualifications and Discipline Review Board.  No member of the Mediator 
Qualifications and Discipline Review Board shall serve on the committee. 
 
(c) 
Membership and Terms.  The membership of the committee shall be 
composed of 1 county mediator, 1 family mediator, and 1 circuit mediator from 
each division and shall be appointed by the chief justice.  At least one of the 9 
members shall also be a certified dependency mediator, and at least one of the 9 
members shall also be a certified appellate mediator.  All appointments shall be for 
4 years.  No member shall serve more than 2 consecutive terms.  The committee 
shall select 1 member as chair and 1 member as vice-chair. 
 
(d) 
Meetings.  The committee shall meet in person or by telephone 
conference as necessary at the direction of the chair to consider requests for 
advisory opinions.  A quorum shall consist of a majority of the members appointed 
to the committee. All requests for advisory opinions shall be in writing.  The 
committee may vote by any means as directed by the chair. 
 
(e) 
Opinions.  Upon due deliberation, and upon the concurrence of a 
majority of the committee, the committee shall render opinions.  A majority of all 
members shall be required to concur in any advisory opinion issued by the 
committee.  The opinions shall be signed by the chair, or vice-chair in the absence 
 
- 64 - 
of the chair, filed with the Dispute Resolution Center, published in the Dispute 
Resolution Center newsletter, and be made available upon request. 
 
(f) 
Effect of Opinions.  While reliance by a mediator on an opinion of 
the committee shall not constitute a defense in any disciplinary proceeding, it shall 
be evidence of good faith and may be considered by the board in relation to any 
determination of guilt or in mitigation of punishment.   
 
(g) 
Confidentiality.  Prior to publication, all references to the requesting 
mediator or any other real person, firm, organization, or corporation shall be 
deleted from any request for an opinion, any document associated with the 
preparation of an opinion, and any opinion issued by the committee.  This rule 
shall apply to all opinions, past and future. 
 
(h) 
Support.  The Dispute Resolution Center shall provide all support 
necessary for the committee to fulfill its duties under these rules. 
 
Committee Notes 
 
2000 Revision.  The Mediator Ethics Advisory Committee was formerly the 
Mediator Qualifications Advisory Panel.