Title: In Re: Amendments To Florida Rule of Civil Procedure

State: florida

Issuer: Florida Supreme Court

Document:

Supreme Court of Florida 
 
 
____________ 
 
No. SC10-2329 
____________ 
 
 
IN RE:  AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 
1.720. 
 
[November 3, 2011] 
 
PER CURIAM. 
 
This matter is before the Court for consideration of proposed amendments to 
Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.720 (Mediation Procedures).  We have 
jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 2(a), Fla. Const. 
The Committee on Alternative Dispute Resolution Rules and Policy 
(Committee) has filed a petition to amend rule 1.720.  The amendments proposed 
by the Committee revise the requirements in rule 1.720 pertaining to the 
appearance of a party or a party’s representative at a mediation conference.  The 
proposals are in response to the Committee’s charge to monitor court rules 
governing alternative dispute resolution procedures and to make recommendations 
as necessary to improve the use of mediation.  See In re Committee on Alternative 
 
- 2 - 
Dispute Resolution Rules and Policy, Fla. Admin. Order No. AOSC03-32 (July 8, 
2003).   
The Committee’s proposals were approved by The Florida Bar’s Civil 
Procedure Rules Committee.  The Court published the proposed amendments for 
comment.  Two comments were filed and the Committee filed a response.   
Having considered the Committee’s petition, the comments filed, and the 
Committee’s response, we adopt the amendments to rule 1.720 as proposed by the 
Committee, with a minor modification to new subdivision (e) (Certification of 
Authority).  We modify new subdivision (e) to provide that the written notice be 
served on all parties participating in a mediation conference.  
Accordingly, Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.720 is hereby amended as set 
forth in the appendix to this opinion.  New language is indicated by underscoring, 
and 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 rule.  The 
amendments shall become effective January 1, 2012, at 12:01 a.m. 
It is so ordered. 
CANADY, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, 
and PERRY, JJ., concur. 
 
THE FILING OF A MOTION FOR REHEARING SHALL NOT ALTER THE 
EFFECTIVE DATE OF THESE AMENDMENTS. 
 
 
 
- 3 - 
Original Proceeding – The Supreme Court Committee on Alternative Dispute 
Resolution Rules and Policy 
 
Judge William D. Palmer, Chair, Committee on Alternative Dispute Resolution 
Rules and Policy, Fifth District Court of Appeal, Daytona Beach, Florida, 
 
 
for Petitioner 
 
Donald E. Christopher, Chair, Civil Procedure Rules Committee, Orlando, Florida, 
and John F. Harkness, Jr., The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, Florida; and Patrick S. 
Scott of Gray Robinson, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 
 
 
Responding with comments 
 
- 4 - 
APPENDIX 
RULE 1.720. 
MEDIATION PROCEDURES 
 
(a) 
 Interim or Emergency Relief.    [NO CHANGE] 
 
(b) 
Sanctions for Failure to Appear.Appearance at Mediation.  If a 
party fails to appear at a duly noticed mediation conference without good cause, 
the court upon motion shall impose sanctions, including an award of mediator and 
attorneys’ fees and other costs, against the party failing to appear.  If a party to 
mediation is a public entity required to conduct its business pursuant to chapter 
286, Florida Statutes, that party shall be deemed to appear at a mediation 
conference by the physical presence of a representative with full authority to 
negotiate on behalf of the entity and to recommend settlement to the appropriate 
decision-making body of the entity.  Otherwise, unlessUnless otherwise permitted 
by court order or stipulated by the parties or changed by order of the courtin 
writing, a party is deemed to appear at a mediation conference if the following 
persons are physically present: 
 
(1) 
The party or it’sa party representative having full authority to 
settle without further consultation; and 
 
(2) 
The party’s counsel of record, if any; and 
 
(3) 
A representative of the insurance carrier for any insured party 
who is not such carrier’s outside counsel and who has full authority to settle in an 
amount up to the amount of the plaintiff’s last demand or policy limits, whichever 
is less, without further consultation. 
 
(c) 
Party Representative Having Full Authority to Settle.  A “party 
representative having full authority to settle” shall mean the final decision maker 
with respect to all issues presented by the case who has the legal capacity to 
execute a binding settlement agreement on behalf of the party.  Nothing herein 
shall be deemed to require any party or party representative who appears at a 
mediation conference in compliance with this rule to enter into a settlement 
agreement. 
 
(d) 
Appearance by Public Entity.  If a party to mediation is a public 
entity required to operate in compliance with chapter 286, Florida Statutes, that 
party shall be deemed to appear at a mediation conference by the physical presence 
 
- 5 - 
of a representative with full authority to negotiate on behalf of the entity and to 
recommend settlement to the appropriate decision-making body of the entity.   
 
(e) 
Certification of Authority.  Unless otherwise stipulated by the 
parties, each party, 10 days prior to appearing at a mediation conference, shall file 
with the court and serve all parties a written notice identifying the person or 
persons who will be attending the mediation conference as a party representative or 
as an insurance carrier representative, and confirming that those persons have the 
authority required by subdivision (b).  
 
(f) 
Sanctions for Failure to Appear.  If a party fails to appear at a duly 
noticed mediation conference without good cause, the court, upon motion, shall 
impose sanctions, including award of mediation fees, attorneys’ fees, and costs, 
against the party failing to appear.  The failure to file a confirmation of authority 
required under subdivision (e) above, or failure of the persons actually identified in 
the confirmation to appear at the mediation conference,  shall create a rebuttable 
presumption of a failure to appear.    
 
(c)(g) Adjournments.    [NO CHANGE] 
 
(d)(h) Counsel.    [NO CHANGE] 
 
(e)(i) Communication with Parties or Counsel.  The mediator may meet 
and consult privately with any party or parties or their counsel. 
 
(f)(j) Appointment of the Mediator.    [NO CHANGE] 
 
(g)(k) Compensation of the Mediator.    [NO CHANGE] 
 
 
Committee Notes 
 
 2011 Amendment.  Mediated settlement conferences pursuant 
to this rule are meant to be conducted when the participants actually 
engaged in the settlement negotiations have full authority to settle the 
case without further consultation.  New language in subdivision (c) 
now defines “a party representative with full authority to settle” in 
two parts.  First, the party representative must be the final decision 
maker with respect to all issues presented by the case in question.  
Second, the party representative must  have the legal capacity to 
 
- 6 - 
execute a binding agreement on behalf of the settling party.  These are 
objective standards.  Whether or not these standards have been met 
can be determined without reference to any confidential mediation 
communications.  A decision by a party representative not to settle 
does not, in and of itself, signify the absence of full authority to settle.  
A party may delegate full authority to settle to more than one person, 
each of whom can serve as the final decision maker.  A party may also 
designate multiple persons to serve together as the final decision 
maker, all of whom must appear at mediation. 
 
New subdivision (e) provides a process for parties to identify 
party representative and representatives of insurance carriers who will 
be attending the mediation conference on behalf of parties and 
insurance carriers and to confirm their respective settlement authority 
by means of a direct representation to the court. If necessary, any 
verification of this representation would be upon motion by a party or 
inquiry by the court without involvement of the mediator and would 
not require disclosure of confidential mediation communications.   
Nothing in this rule shall be deemed to impose any duty or obligation 
on the mediator selected by the parties or appointed by the court to  
ensure compliance.  
 
The concept of self determination in mediation also 
contemplates the parties’ free choice in structuring and organizing 
their mediation sessions, including those who are to participate.  
Accordingly,  elements of this rule are subject to revision or 
qualification with the mutual consent of the parties.