Podcasts about arbitrators

Paul J. Molinaro, M.D., J.D. is a California mediator and arbitrator who brings a somewhat unusual perspective to dispute resolution. He has practiced medicine for many years before becoming a lawyer and now focus on mediating medical malpractice, personal injury, and other complex injury cases.Paul has worked on both sides of the medicine–law divide, he often speaks about how physicians, lawyers, and litigants actually think during high-stakes disputes, and how cognitive bias, risk perception, and communication styles can make or break a mediation. He believes that perspective can be useful for attorneys, mediators, and anyone interested in conflict resolution.By way of background, He is a physician since 1991 and a lawyer since 2006, and has recently completed advanced dispute-resolution training at Pepperdine's Straus Institute. He has currently mediate cases involving medical and bodily injury issues and speak to legal audiences about mediation and negotiation.______________________________Paul J. Molinaro, M.D., J.D.Mediator, Arbitrator, Attorney at Law, Physician, Real Estate Broker______________________________MD JD Dispute Resolution4160 Temescal Canyon Road, Suite 306Corona, CA 92883(951)520-9684 Ext. 102paul@mdjddisputeresolution.com www.mdjddisputeresolution.comSCHEDULE YOUR MEDIATION: https://ichatmediation.com/calendar/OFFICIAL BLOG: https://ichatmediation.com/podcastOFFICIAL YOUTUBE: http://www.youtube.com/ichatmediationOFFICIAL LINKEDIN: https://www.linkedin.com/company/ichat-mediation/ABOUT MATTHEW BRICKMAN:Matthew Brickman is a Supreme Court of Florida certified county civil family mediator who has worked in the 15th and 19th Judicial Circuit Courts since 2009 and 2006 respectively. He is also an appellate certified mediator who mediates a variety of small claims, civil, and family cases. Mr. Brickman recently graduated both the Harvard Business School Negotiation Mastery Program and the Negotiation Master Class at Harvard Law School. 

On today's Legally Speaking Podcast, I'm joined by three fantastic guests from the world of disputes. First, Loukas Mistelis, International Arbitration Partner at Clyde & Co, Professor of Transnational Commercial Law and Arbitration at Queen Mary University of London and Co-Chair of London International Disputes Week. Next, returning guest Henrietta (Hetti) Jackson-Stops, mediator, Partner of IPOS Mediation, founder of Simply Resolved, former Allen & Overy litigator, former Government lawyer, and currently leading the LegalTech Showcase at LIDW. And also returning to the show, Emilie Jones, Legal Director and Barrister at Pinsent Masons, Co-Chair of London International Disputes Week, specialising in commercial litigation and leading Pinsent Masons' Litigation and Regulatory practice development function.This episode is all about the modern litigator and arbitrator, and how legal tech and AI are changing dispute resolution in practice, not just in principle. Because the real question is no longer whether change is coming. It is what has actually changed, what is genuinely adding value, and what still depends on human judgment. So today, we are getting into the realities of modern disputes practice, the opportunities, the risks and what great litigators and arbitrators need to look like in 2026.So why should you be listening in? You can hear Rob, Loukas, Hetti and Emilie discussing:- Artificial Intelligence Enhancing Efficiency In Litigation, Arbitration and Mediation- Online Dispute Resolution Expanding Cross-Border Collaboration and Accessibility- Document Review Technology Transforming Complex Case Management- Human Judgment Remaining Essential Despite Rapid Legal Tech Adoption- Legal Professionals Focusing On Practical Value Beyond AI HypeConnect with Emilie Jones here - https://www.linkedin.com/in/emilie-j-a32415162Connect with Loukas Mistelis here - https://uk.linkedin.com/in/prof-loukas-mistelis-fciarb-0a736b1bConnect with Henrietta Jackson-Stops here - https://uk.linkedin.com/in/henrietta-hetti-jackson-stops-2331482

Paul Molinaro, M.D., J.D. joins Steve Wood, Ph.D. for part 2 of their conversation about medical malpractice litigation from Paul's unique perspective as a Physician, Attorney, Mediator, and Arbitrator. Paul talks about his role as a mediator, shares his philosophy on managing mediations, and how he approaches different mediation scenarios. Paul gives examples of two types of mediations: facilitative and evaluative. Steve and Paul also talk about anchoring in mediation and the power of the "middle number." Lastly, Paul shares his recommendations and suggestions to attorneys to best prepare for mediation.

The Neutral's Playbook: Practical Guides for Counsel in Arbitration and Mediation is a four-part series exploring the realities of modern dispute resolution. Featuring experienced arbitration and mediation practitioners, the series delivers action-oriented guidance to counsel navigating complex proceedings. Whether addressing domestic or international disputes, each conversation offers practical insight for lawyers, arbitrators, and emerging practitioners alike.In this episode, IADC Speaks Host Al Vance (Vance Dispute Resolution, PC) chats with Daniela Karollus-Bruner (CMS – Vienna) and Christopher A. Kenney (Bowditch & Dewey, LLP) on how to prepare and manage arbitration. The conversation covers topics such as how to get an arbitrator engaged, the noticeable differences between US and international arbitrations, and primary drivers for the use of arbitration.--Join the IADC for our first International Arbitration Skills Academy {July 4}. This one-day advocacy training will guide attendees in the art of cross-examination as it relates to international arbitration. You'll discuss techniques, watch demonstrations, and participate in a mock hearing. Learn more: https://www.iadclaw.org/events/international-arbitration-skills-academy/

Paul Molinaro, M.D., J.D., who is a Physician, Attorney, Mediator, Arbitrator and founder of MD JD Dispute Resolution, joins Steve Wood, Ph.D. to share his background on his many roles and experience with medical malpractice cases. Paul and Steve discuss the standard of care, how Paul evaluates the cases that he is approached to work on, how patients and jurors judge physicians, how they perceive the standard of care and the expertise of physicians, and the role of expert witnesses in med mal cases. They also talk about the business of medicine and how that can impact patient care. Steve and Paul dive into the reactions and concerns they deal with when physicians get sued and what has changed in medical malpractice litigation over the past 20 years, particularly with the advent of AI.

Trumps Always Chickens Out. Als puntje bij paaltje komt, haakt president Trump af en zet hij zijn dreigement niet door. Een uitdrukking die je als belegger héél véél hebt gehoord. Er komt nu een bij: NACHO. Klinkt lekker, maar dat is het niet. En heeft te maken met de Iran-oorlog die diezelfde Trump is gestart. Not A Chance Hormuz Opens, dat is waar je als belegger nu rekening mee moet houden. Dat is waar we het deze aflevering over hebben. Het scenario dat de Straat van Hormuz voorlopig dicht blijft. Een redelijk realistisch vooruitzicht, nu de vredesgesprekken tussen Iran en de VS zijn geklapt. Met NACHO moet je rekening houden met een lange periode van hoge olieprijs én inflatie. Hebben we het ook over Air France-KLM. Dat gaat verdwijnen. De naam dan, lezen we in De Telegraaf. Topman Ben Smith wil op overnamepad en wil meer luchtvaartmaatschappijen toevoegen. Waardoor de naam Air France-KLM niet meer past. Goed moment voor ons om te kijken naar dat nieuwe concern dat ontstaat. Is dat dan eindelijk een goede investering? Ook in deze aflevering: een spannend verhaal over insider trading. Een netwerk van advocaten gaf maar liefst 12 jaar lang informatie aan elkaar door over enorme deals op Wall Street. Een explosief verhaal. Over explosief gesproken: we bespreken het aandeel Rheinmetall. Het Duitse defensiebedrijf gaat niet lekker op de beurs, terwijl het juist zou moeten profiteren van al het leed in de wereld. Te gast: Corné van Zeijl van Cardano. BNR Beurs is een journalistiek onafhankelijke productie, mede mogelijk gemaakt door Saxo. Over de makers: Jelle Maasbach is presentator van BNR Beurs en freelance financieel journalist. Zijn favoriete aandeel om over te praten is Disney, maar daar lijkt hij de enige in te zijn. Sinds de eerste uitzending van BNR Beurs is 'ie er bij. Maxim van Mil is presentator van BNR Beurs en journalist bij BNR, waar hij zich focust op de financiële markten en ontwikkelingen in de tech-wereld. Je krijgt hem het meest enthousiast als hij kan praten over ASML, of oer-Hollandse bedrijven zoals Ahold of ABN Amro. Jorik Simonides is presentator van BNR Beurs, economieredacteur en verslaggever bij BNR. Hij wordt er vooral blij van als het een keer níet over AI gaat. Milou Brand is presentator van BNR Beurs, freelance podcastmaker en columnist bij het Financieele Dagblad. Jochem Visser is presentator van BNR Beurs, maakt Beursnerd XL en is redacteur bij de podcast Onder Curatoren. Vraag hem naar obscure zaken op financiële markten en hij vertelt je waarom het eigenlijk nóg leuker is dan je al dacht. Over de podcast: Met BNR Beurs ga je altijd voorbereid de nieuwe beursdag in. We praten je in een kleine 25 minuten bij over alle laatste ontwikkelingen op de handelsvloer. We blijven niet alleen bij de AEX of Wall Street, maar vertellen je ook waar nog meer kansen liggen. En we houden het niet bij de cijfers, maar zoeken ook iedere dag voor je naar duiding van scherpe gasten en experts. Of je nu een ervaren belegger bent of net begint met je eerste stappen op de beurs, de podcast biedt waardevolle inzichten voor je beleggingsstrategie. Door de focus op zowel de korte termijn als de lange termijn, helpt BNR Beurs luisteraars om de ruis van de markt te scheiden van de essentie. Van Musk tot Microsoft en van Ahold tot ASML. Wij vertellen je wat beleggers bezighoudt, wie de markten in beweging zet en wat dat betekent voor jouw beleggingsportefeuille.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Trumps Always Chickens Out. Als puntje bij paaltje komt, haakt president Trump af en zet hij zijn dreigement niet door. Een uitdrukking die je als belegger héél véél hebt gehoord. Er komt nu een bij: NACHO. Klinkt lekker, maar dat is het niet. En heeft te maken met de Iran-oorlog die diezelfde Trump is gestart. Not A Chance Hormuz Opens, dat is waar je als belegger nu rekening mee moet houden. Dat is waar we het deze aflevering over hebben. Het scenario dat de Straat van Hormuz voorlopig dicht blijft. Een redelijk realistisch vooruitzicht, nu de vredesgesprekken tussen Iran en de VS zijn geklapt. Met NACHO moet je rekening houden met een lange periode van hoge olieprijs én inflatie. Hebben we het ook over Air France-KLM. Dat gaat verdwijnen. De naam dan, lezen we in De Telegraaf. Topman Ben Smith wil op overnamepad en wil meer luchtvaartmaatschappijen toevoegen. Waardoor de naam Air France-KLM niet meer past. Goed moment voor ons om te kijken naar dat nieuwe concern dat ontstaat. Is dat dan eindelijk een goede investering? Ook in deze aflevering: een spannend verhaal over insider trading. Een netwerk van advocaten gaf maar liefst 12 jaar lang informatie aan elkaar door over enorme deals op Wall Street. Een explosief verhaal. Over explosief gesproken: we bespreken het aandeel Rheinmetall. Het Duitse defensiebedrijf gaat niet lekker op de beurs, terwijl het juist zou moeten profiteren van al het leed in de wereld. Te gast: Corné van Zeijl van Cardano. BNR Beurs is een journalistiek onafhankelijke productie, mede mogelijk gemaakt door Saxo. Over de makers: Jelle Maasbach is presentator van BNR Beurs en freelance financieel journalist. Zijn favoriete aandeel om over te praten is Disney, maar daar lijkt hij de enige in te zijn. Sinds de eerste uitzending van BNR Beurs is 'ie er bij. Maxim van Mil is presentator van BNR Beurs en journalist bij BNR, waar hij zich focust op de financiële markten en ontwikkelingen in de tech-wereld. Je krijgt hem het meest enthousiast als hij kan praten over ASML, of oer-Hollandse bedrijven zoals Ahold of ABN Amro. Jorik Simonides is presentator van BNR Beurs, economieredacteur en verslaggever bij BNR. Hij wordt er vooral blij van als het een keer níet over AI gaat. Milou Brand is presentator van BNR Beurs, freelance podcastmaker en columnist bij het Financieele Dagblad. Jochem Visser is presentator van BNR Beurs, maakt Beursnerd XL en is redacteur bij de podcast Onder Curatoren. Vraag hem naar obscure zaken op financiële markten en hij vertelt je waarom het eigenlijk nóg leuker is dan je al dacht. Over de podcast: Met BNR Beurs ga je altijd voorbereid de nieuwe beursdag in. We praten je in een kleine 25 minuten bij over alle laatste ontwikkelingen op de handelsvloer. We blijven niet alleen bij de AEX of Wall Street, maar vertellen je ook waar nog meer kansen liggen. En we houden het niet bij de cijfers, maar zoeken ook iedere dag voor je naar duiding van scherpe gasten en experts. Of je nu een ervaren belegger bent of net begint met je eerste stappen op de beurs, de podcast biedt waardevolle inzichten voor je beleggingsstrategie. Door de focus op zowel de korte termijn als de lange termijn, helpt BNR Beurs luisteraars om de ruis van de markt te scheiden van de essentie. Van Musk tot Microsoft en van Ahold tot ASML. Wij vertellen je wat beleggers bezighoudt, wie de markten in beweging zet en wat dat betekent voor jouw beleggingsportefeuille.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This podcast conversation goes into a corner of the legal industry that quietly runs on trust, process control, and confidentiality: alternative dispute resolution. With this topic on the agenda, it's a pleasure to welcome to the Legal Tech StartUp Focus podcast, Gary Doernhoefer, founder of ADR Notable (https://www.adrnotable.com).Gary brings the perspective of a longtime in-house counsel, to what mediators and arbitrators actually do day-to-day, and also to the question of why “case management software” built for law firm advocacy often misses the mark for neutrals. Gary talks about several important ADR-related topics: the real workflow pain, the need to schedule across multiple parties, the necessity of secure communications, the management of curated document sets, the importance of structured note-taking, and the surprisingly tricky problem of splitting invoices between parties.In addition to discussing ADR, Gary shares candid advice for legal tech startup leaders. Here, Gary focuses on timing and product-market fit, especially when you have to spend too long explaining why buyers need the tool in the first place. If you care about mediation software, arbitration platforms, and ADR case management, you'll leave this podcast episode with practical insight and a clearer lens on what “value” for ADR really means.

Major life events like divorce, inheritance, or changing family dynamics can feel deeply personal, but they often carry immediate legal and financial consequences. How can you make thoughtful decisions when emotions are high and the stakes are long-term? Host Cassandra Cross sits down with Sierra Yanish, Family Lawyer, Mediator, and Arbitrator at BDL Family Law, to explore how personal transitions quickly become legal and financial turning points. Together, they unpack the assumptions, blind spots, and emotional pressures that can shape financial outcomes for years to come. You'll hear: • Why personal milestones can trigger legal consequences sooner than expected   • Common misconceptions about divorce, inheritances, and "separate" finances   • How emotional decision-making can impact long-term financial security   • The importance of cash flow, support structures, and holistic planning   • Why slowing down and building the right advisory team can lead to better outcomes   If you're navigating a major life transition, or want to be better prepared for one, this episode offers practical, grounded insights to help you protect your financial future and move forward with clarity and confidence.

David Allison and Jeremy Johnson  In this episode, David Allison is joined by leading barrister Jeremy Johnson to compare divorce and financial claims in England and Wales with the system in New Zealand. The discussion focuses on issues relevant to individuals with connections to both jurisdictions. Looking at both jurisdictions, they cover: • Jurisdiction for divorce, including domicile and residency • Financial claims on divorce • Maintenance claims • Claims available to non-married couples • Pre- and post-nuptial agreements • Key differences between England and Wales and New Zealand  About the speakers: David Allison is a highly regarded family lawyer and accredited mediator. The focus of his practice is financial claims on divorce, particularly those involving jurisdiction disputes, international asset structures, and families with connections to multiple countries. He works closely with overseas lawyers and professionals to coordinate strategies that protect individual's interests while maintaining a constructive, solutions-focused approach. Known for his calm and thoughtful style, David combines technical precision with a deep understanding of the human context behind each matter he deals with. He supports people through challenging transitions with clear guidance, helping them move forward with stability and confidence. David is a member of both the International Academy of Family Lawyers, where he is chair of the Gender Identity and Sexuality Committee and Secretary to the Executive Committee, and the UK & Ireland LGBT Family Law Institute.  Jeremy Johnson is one of New Zealand's leading barristers. Jeremy is an experienced trial, arbitration and appellate advocate with expertise in relationship property, commercial, shareholder, insolvency, equity and trust law.  Jeremy works across the Asia-Pacific region.  Jeremy is a member of the Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners (STEP), a Fellow of the Arbitrators and Mediators Institute of New Zealand (AMINZ), a Fellow of the International Academy of Family Lawyers (IAFL), and a member of the International Trust Arbitration Organisation Advisory Board (ITAO).

Today, we're mixing it up on Anatomy of a Trial. We won't be talking about trials at all.We're going to be talking about arbitration! In civil cases, if you don't go to trial, you might end up in what's called arbitration. It's a different method of dispute resolution. We feel it's something that many of our listeners may actually encounter.Our expert today is attorney Norris Cunningham. Norris Cunningham is an attorney with Stoll Keenon Ogden in Indianapolis. He was a co-founder of the firm Katz Korin Cunningham. He has long focused on legal disputes involving healthcare. He authored a book Inside the Minds: Health Care Law Client Strategies. Most importantly for our conversation today, he is an arbitrator. In fact, he's certified by both the American Arbitration Association and the American Health Lawyers Association.Check out our upcoming book events and get links to buy tickets here: https://murdersheetpodcast.com/eventsOrder our book on Delphi here: https://bookshop.org/p/books/shadow-of-the-bridge-the-delphi-murders-and-the-dark-side-of-the-american-heartland-aine-cain/21866881?ean=9781639369232Or here: https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Shadow-of-the-Bridge/Aine-Cain/9781639369232Or here: https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Bridge-Murders-American-Heartland/dp/1639369236Join our Patreon here! https://www.patreon.com/c/murdersheetSupport The Murder Sheet by buying a t-shirt here: https://www.murdersheetshop.com/Check out more inclusive sizing and t-shirt and merchandising options here: https://themurdersheet.dashery.com/Send tips to murdersheet@gmail.com.The Murder Sheet is a production of Mystery Sheet LLC.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The Advocates Toolbox: Effective Advocacy Strategies for a Successful Mediation, is co-hosted by Mia Levi, Vice President and Corporate Secretary, CPR Dispute Resolution Services LLC, and Rachel Gupta, Mediator and Arbitrator at JAMS. This podcast will cover the skills business lawyers need to be successful advocates in mediation. Episode 6: The Mediation Wishlist. In the final episode of this series, experienced mediation practitioners will provide their “wishlist" for mediation from two distinct viewpoints: the client and the mediator. What circumstances create the optimal dynamic for a mediation? The speakers will explore key takeaways for the who, what, and how to maximize the chances of reaching an agreement in mediation. Speakers: Cindy Randall, Deputy General Counsel and Head of Litigation at Microsoft and Jeff Kichaven, Principal at Jeff Kichaven, Commercial Mediation.

Our speakers will discuss commonly used techniques for impasse breaking in mediation, including but not limited to, bracketing and mediator's proposal, and will examine when and how to use these tools effectively. Speakers: Noah Hanft, Arbitrator and Mediator at AcumenADR LLC and Jennifer Lupo, Lupo Law, Arbitration & Mediation.

In this episode we speak with Julie M. Walker, an experienced arbitrator and mediator from Denver, Colorado, about a recent scam attempt she experienced and thwarted.  We discuss how to recognize such scams, the best steps to take in response, and the growing prevalence of such schemes. Learn more about Julie here: https://irelandstapleton.com/people/julie-m-walker/  

The Advocates Toolbox: Effective Advocacy Strategies for a Successful Mediation, is co-hosted by Mia Levi, Vice President and Corporate Secretary, CPR Dispute Resolution Services LLC, and Rachel Gupta, Mediator and Arbitrator at JAMS. This podcast will cover the skills business lawyers need to be successful advocates in mediation. Episode 4: Effective Mediation Advocacy. This session will cover the types of attorney behaviors that are productive (and those that are counterproductive) in the mediation session, as well as practical tips from mediators for getting your adversary to move their position and how to keep building momentum. Speakers: L. Tyrone Holt, Managing Principal at The Holt Group LLC, and Theo Chang, Arbitrator and Mediator at ADR Office of Theo Cheng LLC.

The Advocates Toolbox: Effective Advocacy Strategies for a Successful Mediation, is co-hosted by Mia Levi, Vice President and Corporate Secretary, CPR Dispute Resolution Services LLC, and Rachel Gupta, Mediator and Arbitrator at JAMS. This podcast will cover the skills business lawyers need to be successful advocates in mediation. Episode 3: Anchoring Strategy and Messaging in Mediation. Distributive bargaining is a competitive negotiation strategy that is used to decide how to allocate available funds in mediations. The speakers will guide us in developing your anchor, your target settlement range, and the strategy and messaging for achieving it. Speakers: Joan Stearns Johnsen, Mediator at JSJ-ADR and Adrienne Publicover, Mediator at JAMS.

Timothy Ash, who has been professional economist for more than 30 years, with two thirds of that in the banking industry. Timothy's specialism is emerging European economics, and he writes and blogs extensively on economic challenges for leading publications such as the Kyiv Post, Atlantic Council, the Financial Times, and the United Business Journal. He is also an Associate Fellow in the Russia and Eurasia programme at Chatham House and has advised various governments on Ukraine-Russia policy and specifically on the impact of sanctions.----------Tetyana Nesterchuk is Barrister and Arbitrator at Fountain Court Chambers. She is a UK expert at the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe, and a vocal Ukrainian in London. Nesterchuk is doing everything in her power to aid Ukraine's fight against Russia's invasion. For Nesterchuk, the war didn't start in 2022. The war began in 2014 when her hometown of Donetsk was overtaken by Russia-backed separatists before eventually being annexed two years ago. Some of her most vital work now centres on the seizure of Russian state assets, the funds from which she hopes can be redistributed to pay for vital services so sorely needed by the embattled Ukrainian population. She acknowledges that she won't be able to save Ukraine alone, but she won't ever stop doing her part to help.----------TETYANA NESTERCHUK LINKS:https://fountaincourt.uk/profile/tetyana-nesterchuk/https://www.linkedin.com/in/tetyana-nesterchuk-a4469a21/https://www.thelawyer.com/microeventpeople/tetyana-nesterchuk/TIMOTHY ASH LINKS:https://timothyash.substack.com/ https://www.chathamhouse.org/about-us/our-people/timothy-ashhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/timothy-ash-83a87158/https://cepa.org/author/timothy-ash/----------SUPPORT THE CHANNEL:https://www.buymeacoffee.com/siliconcurtainhttps://www.patreon.com/siliconcurtain----------DESCRIPTION:Analyzing the Controversial Ukraine-Russia Peace Plan with ExpertsJoin us in this critical discussion with Timothy Ash and Tetyana Nesterchuk as they delve into the recent developments around the so-called peace negotiation process between the US and Russia. The conversation focuses on the controversial peace plan, suspected to be influenced by Moscow, and its potential implications for Ukraine, Europe, and global security. Timothy Ash, an economist with extensive experience in Ukrainian affairs, and Tetyana Nesterchuk, a barrister and expert in European law, provide their insights on the complexities of the plan, the influence of Russian psychological operations, and the broader geopolitical stakes. They also highlight the importance of Europe leveraging frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine and push back against conceding to Russian demands. This episode emphasizes the urgent need for a principled stance on international law and the decisive action required from European leaders.----------

Follow Dan on LinkedIn at linkedin.com/in/cotterdanFollow Pat on LinkedIn athttps://www.linkedin.com/in/donald-patrick-eckler-610290824/ Predictions Sure To Go Wrong: Aon: Affirm Deppa: Affirm Rosen: PuntIL app:https://www.illinoiscourts.gov/courts/appellate-court/oral-argument-audio/ Aon:https://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/sound/external/ch.24-2017.24-2017_11_03_2025.mp3IN SCT:https://mycourts.in.gov/arguments/default.aspx?&id=3043&view=detail&yr=&when=&page=1&court=sup&search=&direction=%20ASC&future=False&sort=&judge=&county=&admin=False&pageSize=20  

The California Supreme Court's long-awaited "Taking Offense" decision on gender pronouns in elder care facilities introduces a new “captive audience” exception to the First Amendment. Tim worries this new judicial carve out may creep to other forums; Jeff is unperturbed. Tim also shares insights from the Federalist Society National Conference, before examining a significant appellate-fee ruling.Taking Offense v. State (Cal., Nov. 6, 2025, No. S270535) **holds that advocacy groups lack taxpayer standing under CCP §526a to challenge state laws, but still issued 100+ pages addressing the merits through a "captive audience" framework.Captive audience concerns: Tim highlights potential "mission creep" with a “captive audience” rationale, potentially extending beyond elder care facilities to courthouses, government offices, and other venues where First Amendment protections could be weakened.“Bloodthirsty originalism”: From the Federalist Society conference, Judge Bumatay advocated less deference to stare decisis in favor of constitutional fidelity, while Justices Barrett and Kavanaugh addressed courage and civility in legal practice.Discovery fee windfall: In Baer v. Tedder, the court authorized recovery of $113,000 in appellate attorney fees for successfully defending a $10,000 discovery sanction, creating economics similar to anti-SLAPP appeals.AI arbitration arrives: The American Arbitration Association announced a pilot program offering AI resolution of construction disputes with human oversight, signaling that AI's impact on legal practice may be just "a couple of years away" rather than decades.Oral argument mastery: Federal Circuit judges advised narrowing issues to increase credibility, welcoming judicial interruptions as opportunities, and viewing argument time as the court's time for conversation rather than presentation.Tune in for practical insights on appellate strategy, the evolving legal landscape, and how to prepare for significant changes in legal practice in the coming years.

Visit: RadioLawTalk.com for information & full episodes! Follow us on Facebook: bit.ly/RLTFacebook Follow us on Twitter: bit.ly/RLTTwitter Follow us on Instagram: bit.ly/RLTInstagram Subscribe to our YouTube channel: www.youtube.com/channel/UC3Owf1BEB-klmtD_92-uqzg Your Radio Law Talk hosts are exceptional attorneys and love what they do! They take breaks from their day jobs and make time for Radio Law Talk so that the rest of the country can enjoy the law like they do. Follow Radio Law Talk on Youtube, Facebook, Twitter & Instagram!

Nearly two years ago on this podcast, we discussed the American Arbitration Association's innovation initiatives – and specifically its embrace of generative AI – with Bridget Mary McCormack, who became its president and CEO in 2023 after having been chief justice of the Michigan Supreme Court, and Diana Didia, its chief information and innovation officer. On today's episode, McCormack and Didia – now executive vice president and chief technology and innovation officer – return for an update on innovation at the AAA.    In that prior podcast, McCormack and Didia spoke extensively about the AAA's innovation culture and their early experiments with gen AI. At the time, McCormack said that anyone who thinks they know where gen AI is going, even next week, is fooling themselves. While that may still be true, the AAA has certainly made some bold moves in that direction. Most notably, just a few days before we recorded this episode, the AAA announced something unprecedented in the dispute resolution world – an AI-powered arbitrator that it is launching in November. This is not just another AI tool to assist lawyers or arbitrators. This is an AI system that will evaluate case merits, generate recommendations, and prepare draft awards — with human arbitrators validating and signing off on final decisions before they are issued. In today's conversation with host Bob Ambrogi, McCormack and Didia dive deep into how this AI arbitrator works, what it means for the future of dispute resolution, and how it fits into the AAA's broader innovation strategy as the organization approaches its 100th anniversary next year. They also explore the cultural transformation within the AAA that has enabled these technological advances and what is coming next in their AI-native vision for dispute resolution.  Related episodes: On the latest LawNext: Sociologist Rebecca Sandefur on Enhancing Access to Justice. On LawNext: How A New Kind of Justice Worker Could Narrow the Justice Gap, with Nikole Nelson, CEO of Frontline Justice.  On LawNext: CEO Nikole Nelson Returns with An Update on Frontline Justice's Mission to Empower Justice Workers and Bridge the Justice Gap. Thank You To Our Sponsors This episode of LawNext is generously made possible by our sponsors. We appreciate their support and hope you will check them out.   Paradigm, home to the practice management platforms PracticePanther, Bill4Time, MerusCase and LollyLaw; the e-payments platform Headnote; and the legal accounting software TrustBooks. Briefpoint, eliminating routine discovery response and request drafting tasks so you can focus on drafting what matters (or just make it home for dinner). Paxton, Rapidly conduct research, accelerate drafting, and analyze documents with Paxton. What do you need to get done today?    If you enjoy listening to LawNext, please leave us a review wherever you listen to podcasts.  

Today's episode of the Consumer Finance Monitor podcast is centered around a novel and thought-provoking article by David Horton, a professor of law at the University of California, Davis. The article, titled "Do Arbitrators Follow the Law? Evidence from Clause Construction," dives into the intriguing question of whether arbitrators render decisions that align with judicial rulings. Horton explores the longstanding debate on arbitration's adherence to legal standards, focusing on whether arbitrators have followed the Supreme Court's 2019 decision in Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela (2019) that class-wide arbitration is not permitted when an arbitration clause is silent or ambiguous on the matter.  The podcast episode explores the ramifications of Horton's finding that in about 27% of the arbitrations studied, the arbitrators did not follow Lamps Plus.  Horton interprets that finding as suggesting that a significant minority of arbitrators may be motivated by financial considerations in allowing a class arbitration to proceed, notwithstanding Lamps Plus, because it is more lucrative for them than an individual arbitration.    Mark Levin, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, also joins the program. Mark interprets Horton's findings differently, emphasizing that in his view Horton's data strongly supports the conclusion that arbitration is not lawless since an overwhelming majority of the arbitrators (73%) did follow Lamps Plus.  Mark also dismisses Horton's suggestion that some arbitrators' rulings may be swayed by financial considerations as pure speculation.  On the contrary, he observes, the fact that some arbitrators have not strictly followed Lamps Plus does not show they were not following the law since the issue of clause construction has a lengthy complex history and prominent courts such as the Second Circuit have themselves found reasons for distinguishing Lamps Plus.    Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

The agents made their way toward the Jumentierre Estate, and found improvised Valkyrie fliers that would give the Crimson Brothers advantage in the fight. The area was guarded by two Hereteks and a swarm of servo skulls, so Morgan opted for a stealth approach. She sent data from a nearby cogitator to CLO53T, who confirmed that Talos Ivo was meant to be on one of the ships, but when the Judge and their seconded Arbitrators shots at the Hereteks, the servo skull swarm suddenly broke their surveillance pattern and set their sights on the agents. Featuring players Del Borovic, Guy Bradford, Josh Halbot, and Tyler Hewitt, and Dungeon Master Ryan LaPlante. Enjoying Agents of the Inquisition?- Consider becoming a Patron of Dumb-Dumbs & Dice for as little as $1 a month and gain access to a ton of extra BTS fun (https://www.patreon.com/dumbdumbdice)- Buy merch on our website (https://dumbdumbdice.com/)- Watch us on YouTube (https://youtube.com/@dumbdumbdice)- Follow us on Instagram (https://instagram.com/dumbdumbdice)- Follow us on Facebook (https://facebook.com/dumbdumbdice) Artwork by the brilliant Del Borovic- Website & Portfolio (https://delborovic.com/)- Twitter (https://twitter.com/deltastic)

Having escaped the Flensing House, the band took a short rest to treat their wounds and regroup, now in the company of two Arbitrators and a soldier. The Judge's wounds were severe, but only after Morgan pressured him, did he allow Damien to heal him with powers from the warp. Solomon, meanwhile, noticed the Judge having a private conversation with Damien and returning healed, and so began to record evidence of his companions' tendencies towards heresy. Morgan showed her rosette to second the Arbitrators to their mission, and they began to make their way to the Jumentierre Estate, where they should finally find Talos Ivo.  Featuring players Del Borovic, Guy Bradford, Josh Halbot, and Tyler Hewitt, and Dungeon Master Ryan LaPlante. Enjoying Agents of the Inquisition?- Consider becoming a Patron of Dumb-Dumbs & Dice for as little as $1 a month and gain access to a ton of extra BTS fun (https://www.patreon.com/dumbdumbdice)- Buy merch on our website (https://dumbdumbdice.com/)- Watch us on YouTube (https://youtube.com/@dumbdumbdice)- Follow us on Instagram (https://instagram.com/dumbdumbdice)- Follow us on Facebook (https://facebook.com/dumbdumbdice) Artwork by the brilliant Del Borovic- Website & Portfolio (https://delborovic.com/)- Twitter (https://twitter.com/deltastic)

After finishing off the Flayed Man and the Ascended Brother, Damien and Judge Rex sifted through data and learned that Talos Ivo had been transferred to the Jumentierre Estate. Meanwhile, Morgan and Solomon continued fighting their way into the Flensing House, but Damien and the Judge made it out, along with two Arbitrators and another soldier fighting alongside them. Featuring players Del Borovic, Guy Bradford, Josh Halbot, and Tyler Hewitt, and Dungeon Master Ryan LaPlante. Enjoying Agents of the Inquisition?- Consider becoming a Patron of Dumb-Dumbs & Dice for as little as $1 a month and gain access to a ton of extra BTS fun (https://www.patreon.com/dumbdumbdice)- Buy merch on our website (https://dumbdumbdice.com/)- Watch us on YouTube (https://youtube.com/@dumbdumbdice)- Follow us on Instagram (https://instagram.com/dumbdumbdice)- Follow us on Facebook (https://facebook.com/dumbdumbdice) Artwork by the brilliant Del Borovic- Website & Portfolio (https://delborovic.com/)- Twitter (https://twitter.com/deltastic) 

This week we travel (virtually) to Mexico City for a powerful conversation with arbitrator, law firm founder, entrepreneur, wine enthusiast—and CIArb North America Chair—Cecilia Flores Rueda!

Inside the Flensing House, Damien fought and seriously wounded the Flayed Man, while outside, Larsa Quinn was killed and Arbitrators joined the fight against the Flayed Guard. Despite their heretical clothing, Solomon's shouted praising of the Emperor convinced the Arbitrators that he and Morgan were on their side, and they all started fighting their way up to help Damien and the Judge. Featuring players Del Borovic, Guy Bradford, Josh Halbot, and Tyler Hewitt, and Dungeon Master Ryan LaPlante. Enjoying Agents of the Inquisition?- Consider becoming a Patron of Dumb-Dumbs & Dice for as little as $1 a month and gain access to a ton of extra BTS fun (https://www.patreon.com/dumbdumbdice)- Buy merch on our website (https://dumbdumbdice.com/)- Watch us on YouTube (https://youtube.com/@dumbdumbdice)- Follow us on Instagram (https://instagram.com/dumbdumbdice)- Follow us on Facebook (https://facebook.com/dumbdumbdice) Artwork by the brilliant Del Borovic- Website & Portfolio (https://delborovic.com/)- Twitter (https://twitter.com/deltastic)

Barry Winograd, arbitrator, mediator and adjunct law professor, joined the America's Work Force Union Podcast to discuss the Trump administration's efforts to dismantle federal sector unions. Winograd explored the legal challenges to Collective Bargaining Agreements, the use of national security as justification and the potential long-term impacts on workers' rights. David Leopold, an immigration and labor attorney, joined the America's Work Force Union Podcast to discuss the current state of immigration enforcement, its impact on workers and businesses and the urgent need for comprehensive reform.

The NFL dead season abyss, allows us to talk about some things off the field. An Arbitrator recently finds Commissioner Roger Goodell encouraged NFL owners to reduce guarantees for veterans and quarterbacks. This started when Jimmy Haslem and his Cleveland Browns gave DeSean Watson $230 million fully guaranteed. This also potentially affected AFC North QB's Lamar Jackson and former Steelers Russel Wilson. Pay will lead the discussion. Arron Rodgers on McAfee alluded to this being a one and done season. B-Dirt handicaps Joel Burrow's MVP odds and shares his 2025 statistical predictions for the superstar QB. All this & more when you rock out with the Homies. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

At the crash site, the Inquisitorial agents discovered that their target, Talos Ivo, was gone and the Arbitrators were on their way to the hive to locate the Khornate cultists. Morgan suggested they disguise themselves as cultists and move quickly and covertly to get ahead of the Arbitrators and find the Heretek first. They donned cultist robes and prepared to infiltrate the hive. Featuring players Del Borovic, Guy Bradford, Josh Halbot, and Tyler Hewitt, and Dungeon Master Ryan LaPlante. Enjoying Agents of the Inquisition?- Consider becoming a Patron of Dumb-Dumbs & Dice for as little as $1 a month and gain access to a ton of extra BTS fun (https://www.patreon.com/dumbdumbdice)- Buy merch on our website (https://dumbdumbdice.com/)- Watch us on YouTube (https://youtube.com/@dumbdumbdice)- Follow us on Instagram (https://instagram.com/dumbdumbdice)- Follow us on Facebook (https://facebook.com/dumbdumbdice) Artwork by the brilliant Del Borovic- Website & Portfolio (https://delborovic.com/)- Twitter (https://twitter.com/deltastic)

In the second hour, OutKick Sports' Jonathan Hutton joins DVD to discuss an article about NFL Owners may have colluded to keep players from getting fully guaranteed contracts, the Titans, the NFL Offseason, and more. They continued to discuss an article about an arbitrator dismissed NFLPA's collusion case, but found that teams were encouraged to reduce guarantees and more 

Mike Florio breaks down how an arbitrator found the NFL supported teams colluding on guaranteed contracts, explains how the league won but also lost, and dives into why both the NFL and NFLPA tried to hard to keep it all a secret. 0:15 – Arbitrator found NFL encouraged teams to collude regarding guaranteed contracts13:55 – Ruling contained details about specific players negotiations, including Kyler Murray, Lamar Jackson and Russell Wilson26:20 – Why did the NFL & NFLPA keep it secret?38:40 – Where does it go from here? 

Linda A. Michler, Arbitrator and Mediator, speaks with Christopher C. Murray, Partner, Ogletree Deakins, about arbitration in the health care employment space. They discuss how arbitration works; the strengths and weaknesses of arbitration; and issues related to selecting an arbitrator, cost, mediation, class action waivers, and mass arbitration. They also discuss special considerations related to health care employment arbitration, how employers and their counsel can make employment arbitration successful, and AHLA's Dispute Resolution Service and Rules of Procedure for Employment Arbitration.AHLA's Health Law Daily Podcast Is Here! AHLA's popular Health Law Daily email newsletter is now a daily podcast, exclusively for AHLA Premium members. Get all your health law news from the major media outlets on this new podcast! To subscribe and add this private podcast feed to your podcast app, go to americanhealthlaw.org/dailypodcast.

03:07 GOP senators demand answers after Biden ATF caught stealing07:50 Trump pardons sheriff who was convicted of taking bribes17:15 Stolen car nearly hits officer standing in its way before shots are fired29:14 Officer dragged by suspect's car during traffic stop39:00 Arbitrator orders reinstatement of cop fired over Nazi salutesLEO Round Table (law enforcement talk show)Season 10, Episode 107 (2,446) filmed on 05/28/20251. https://www.rvmnews.com/2025/05/gop-senators-demand-answers-after-biden-atf-caught-inflating-salaries/2. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-pardons-former-virginia-sheriff-convicted-taking-75k-bribes3. https://rumble.com/v6tsrrd-nypd-fatally-shoots-man-after-stolen-car-nearly-hits-officer-on-the-belt-pa.html?e9s=src_v1_upp4. https://rumble.com/v6tqmv1-bradenton-police-officer-injured-after-being-dragged-by-car-during-traffic-.html?e9s=src_v1_upp5. https://www.corrections1.com/staff-misconduct/arbitrator-orders-reinstatement-of-ore-probation-officer-fired-over-nazi-salutesShow Panelists and Personalities:Chip DeBlock (Host and retired police detective)Bret Bartlett (retired police Captain)Chuck Springer (retired lieutenant)Dr. Darrin Porcher (retired NYPD Lieutenant)Related Events, Organizations and Books:Retired DEA Agent Robert Mazur's works:Interview of Bryan Cranston about him playing Agent Robert Mazur in THE INFILTRATOR filmhttps://vimeo.com/channels/1021727Trailer for the new book, THE BETRAYALhttps://www.robertmazur.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/The-Betrayal-trailer-reMix2.mp4Everything on Robert Mazurhttps://www.robertmazur.com/The Wounded Blue - Lt. Randy Sutton's charityhttps://thewoundedblue.org/Rescuing 911: The Fight For America's Safety - by Lt. Randy Sutton (Pre-Order)https://rescuing911.org/Books by panelist and retired Lt. Randy Sutton:https://www.amazon.com/Randy-Sutton/e/B001IR1MQU%3Fref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_shareThey're Lying: The Media, The Left, and The Death of George Floyd - by Liz Collin (Lt. Bob Kroll's wife)https://thelieexposed.com/Lt. Col. Dave Grossman - Books, Newsletter, Presentations, Shop, Sheepdogshttps://grossmanontruth.com/Sheriff David Clarke - Videos, Commentary, Podcast, Shop, Newsletterhttps://americassheriff.com/Content Partners:Red Voice Media - Real News, Real Reportinghttps://www.redvoicemedia.com/shows/leo/ThisIsButter - One of the BEST law enforcement video channelshttps://rumble.com/user/ThisIsButterThe Free Press - LEO Round Table is in their Cops and Crimes section 5 days a weekhttps://www.tampafp.com/https://www.tampafp.com/category/cops-and-crime/Video Show Schedule On All Outlets:http://leoroundtable.com/home/syndication/Syndicated Radio Schedule:http://leoroundtable.com/radio/syndicated-radio-stations/Sponsors:Galls - Proud to serve America's public safety professionalshttps://www.galls.com/leoCompliant Technologies - Cutting-edge non-lethal tools to empower and protect those who servehttps://www.complianttechnologies.net/Blue To Gold - training that is relevant and relatable to every street officerhttps://bluetogold.com/The International Firearm Specialist Academy - The New Standard for Firearm Knowledgehttps://www.gunlearn.com/MyMedicare.live - save money in Medicare insurance options from the expertshttp://www.mymedicare.live/

Arbitrators and counsel can use artificial intelligence to improve service quality and lessen work burden, but they also must deal with the ethical and professional implications. In this episode, Rebeca Mosquera, a Reed Smith associate and president of ArbitralWomen, interviews Benjamin Malek, a partner at T.H.E. Chambers and former chair of the Silicon Valley Arbitration and Mediation Center AI Task Force. They reveal insights and experiences on the current and future applications of AI in arbitration, the potential risks of bias and transparency, and the best practices and guidelines for the responsible integration of AI into dispute resolution. The duo discusses how AI is reshaping arbitration and what it means for arbitrators, counsel and parties. ----more---- Transcript: Intro: Hello, and welcome to Tech Law Talks, a podcast brought to you by Reed Smith's Emerging Technologies Group. In each episode of this podcast, we will discuss cutting-edge issues on technology, data, and the law. We will provide practical observations on a wide variety of technology and data topics to give you quick and actionable tips to address the issues you are dealing with every day.  Rebeca: Welcome to Tech Law Talks and our series on AI. My name is Rebeca Mosquera. I am an attorney with Reed Smith in New York focusing on international arbitration. Today we focus on AI in arbitration. How artificial intelligence is reshaping dispute resolution and the legal profession. Joining me is Benjamin Malek, a partner at THE Chambers and chair of the Silicon Valley Arbitration and Mediation Center AI Task Force. Ben has extensive experience in commercial and investor state arbitration and is at the forefront of AI governance in arbitration. He has worked at leading institutions and law firms, advising on the responsible integration of AI into dispute resolution. He's also founder and CEO of LexArb, an AI-driven case management software. Ben, welcome to Tech Law Talks.  Benjamin: Thank you, Rebeca, for having me.  Rebeca: Well, let's dive in into our questions today. So artificial intelligence is often misunderstood, or put it in other words, there is a lot of misconceptions surrounding AI. How would you define AI in arbitration? And why is it important to look beyond just generative AI?  Benjamin: Yes, thank you so much for having me. AI in arbitration has existed for many years now, But it hasn't been until the rise of generative AI that big question marks have started to arise. And that is mainly because generative AI creates or generates AI output, whereas up until now, it was a relatively mild output. I'll give you one example. Looking for an email in your inbox, that requires a certain amount of AI. Your spellcheck in Word has AI, and it has been used for many years without raising any eyebrows. It hasn't been until ChatGPT has really given an AI tool to the masses that question started arising. What can it do? Will attorneys still be held accountable? Will AI start drafting for them? What will happen? And it's that fear that started generating all this talk about AI. Now, to your question on looking beyond generative AI, I think that is a very important point. In my function as the chair of the SAMC AI Task Force, while we were drafting the guidelines on the use of AI, one of the proposals was to call it use of generative AI in arbitration. And I'm very happy that we stood firm and said no, because there's many forms of AI that will arise over the years. Now we're talking about predictive AI, but there are many AI forms such as predictive AI, NLP, automations, and more. And we use it not only in generating text per se, but we're using it in legal research, in case prediction to a certain extent. Whoever has used LexisNexis, they're using a new tool now where AI is leveraged to predict certain outcomes, document automation, procedural management, and more. So understanding AI as a whole is crucial for responsible adoption.  Rebeca: That's interesting. So you're saying, obviously, that AI and arbitration is more than just chat GPT, right? I think that the reason why people think that and relies on maybe, as we'll see in some of the questions I have for you, that people may rely on chat GPT because it sounds normal. It sounds like another person texting you, providing you with a lot of information. And sometimes we just, you know, people, I can understand or I can see why people might believe that that's the correct outcome. And you've given examples of how AI is already being used and that people might not realize it. So all of that is very interesting. Now, tell me, as chair of the SVAMC AI Task Force, you've led significant initiatives in AI governance, right? What motivated the creation of the SVAMC AI guidelines? And what are their key objectives? And before you dive into that, though, I want to take a moment to congratulate you and the rest of the task force on being nominated once again for the GAR Awards, which will be unveiled during Paris Arbitration Week in April of this year. That's an incredible achievement. And I really hope you'll take pride in the impact of your work and the well-deserved recognition it continues to receive. So good luck to you and the rest of the team.  Benjamin: Thank you, Rebeca. Thank you so much. It really means a lot, and it also reinforces the importance of our work, seeing that we're nominated not only once last year for the GAR Award, but second year in a row. I will be blunt, I haven't kept track of many nominations, but I think it may be one of the first years where one initiative gets nominated twice, one year after the other. So that in itself for us is worth priding ourselves with. And it may potentially even be more than an award itself. It really, it's a testament to the work we have provided. So what led to the creation of the SVAMC AI guidelines? It's a very straightforward and to a certain extent, a little boring answer as of now, because we've heard it so many times. But the crux was Mata versus Avianca. I'm not going to dive into the case. I think most of us have heard it. Who hasn't? There's many sources to find out about it. The idea being that in a court case, an attorney used Chad GPT, used the outcome without verifying it, and it caused a lot of backlash, not only from opposing party, but also being chastised by the judge. Now when I saw that case, and I saw the outcome, and I saw that there were several tangential cases throughout the U.S. And worldwide, I realized that it was only a question of time until something like this could potentially happen in arbitration. So I got on a call with my dear friend Gary Benton at the SVAMC, and I told him that I really think that this is the moment for the Silicon Valley Arbitration Mediation Center, an institution that is heavily invested in tech to shine. So I took it upon myself to say, give me 12 months and I'll come up with guidelines. So up until now at the SVAMC, there are a lot of think tank-like groups discussing many interesting subjects. But the SVAMC scope, especially AI related, was to have something that produces something tangible. So the guidelines to me were intuitive. It was, I will be honest, I don't think I was the only one. I might have just been the first mover, but there we were. We created the idea. It was vetted by the board. And we came up first with the task force, then with the guidelines. And there's a lot more to come. And I'll leave it there.  Rebeca: Well, that's very interesting. And I just wanted to mention or just kind of draw from, you mentioned the Mata case. And you explained a bit about what happened in that case. And I think that was, what, 2023? Is that right? 2022, 2023, right? And so, but just recently we had another one, right? In the federal courts of Wyoming. And I think about two days ago, the order came out from the judge and the attorneys involved were fined about $15,000 because of hallucinations on the case law that they cited to the court. So, you know I see that happening anyway. And this is a major law firm that we're talking about here in the U.S. So it's interesting how we still don't learn, I guess. That would be my take on that.  Benjamin: I mean, I will say this. Learning is a relative term because learning, you need to also fail. You need to make mistakes to learn. I guess the crux and the difference is that up until now, at any law firm or anyone working in law would never entrust a first-year associate, a summer associate, a paralegal to draft arguments or to draft certain parts of a pleading by themselves without supervision. However, now, given that AI sounds sophisticated, because it has unlimited access to words and dictionaries, people assume that it is right. And that is where the problem starts. So I am obviously, personally, I am no one to judge a case, no one to say what to do. And in my capacity of the chair of the SVAMC AI task force, we also take a backseat saying these are soft law guidelines. However, submitting documents with information that has not been verified has, in my opinion, very little to do with AI. It has something to do with ethical duty and candor. And that is something that, in my opinion, if a court wants to fine attorneys, they're more welcome to do so. But that is something that should definitely be referred to the Bar Association to take measures. But again, these are my two cents as a citizen.  Rebeca: No, very good. Very good. So, you know, drawing from that point as well, and because of the cautionary tales we hear about surrounding these cases and many others that we've heard, many see AI as a double-edged sword, right? On the one hand, offering efficiency gains while raising concerns about bias and procedural fairness. What do you see as the biggest risk and benefits of AI in arbitration?  Benjamin: So it's an interesting question. To a certain extent, we tried to address many of the risks in the AI guidelines. Whoever hasn't looked at the guidelines yet, I highly suggest you take a look at them they're available on svamc.org I'm sure that they're widely available on other databases Jus Mundi has it as well. I invite everyone to take a look at it. There are several challenges. We don't believe that those challenges would justify not using it. To name a few, we have bias. We have lack of transparency. We also have the issue of over-reliance, which is the one we were talking about just a minute ago, where it seems so sophisticated that we as human beings, having worked in the field, cannot conceive how such an eloquent answer is anything but true. So there's a black box problem and so many others, but quite frankly, there are so many benefits that come with it. AI is an unlimited knowledge tool that we can use. As of now, AI is what we know it is. It has hallucinations. It does have some bias. There is this black box problem. Where does it come from? Why? What's the source? But quite frankly, if we are able to triage the issues and to really look at what are the advantages and what is it we want to get out of it, and I'll give you a brief example. Let's say you're drafting an RFA. If you know the case, you know the parties, and you know every aspect of the case, AI can draft everything head to toe. You will always be able to tell what is from the case and what's not from the case. If we over-rely on AI and we allow it to draft without verifying all the facts, without making sure we know the transcript inside and out, without knowing the facts of the case, then we will always run into certain issues. Another issue we run into a lot with predictive AI is relying on data that exists. So compared to generative AI, predictive AI is taking data that already exists and predicting another outcome. So there's a lesser likelihood of hallucinations. The issue with that is, of course, bias. Just a brief example, you're the president of Arbitral Women, so you will definitely understand. It has only been in the last 30 years that women had more of a presence in arbitration, specifically sitting as an arbitrator. So if we rely on data that goes beyond those 30, 40, 50 years, there's going to be a lot of male decisions having been taken. Potentially even laws that applied back then that were not very gender neutral. So we need, we as people, need to triage and understand where is the good information, where is information that may have bias and counterbalance it. As of now, we will need to counterbalance it manually. However, as I always say, we've only seen a grain of salt of what AI can do. So as time progresses, the challenges, as you mentioned, will become lesser and lesser and lesser. And the knowledge that AI has will become wider and wider. As of now, especially in arbitration, we are really taking advantage of the fact that there is still scarcity of knowledge. But it is really just a question of time until AI picks up. So we need to get a better understanding of what is it we can do to leverage AI to make ourselves indispensable.  Rebeca: No, that's very interesting, Ben. And as you mentioned, yes, as president of ArbitralWomen, the word bias is something I pay close attention. You know, we're talking about bias. You mentioned bias. And we all have conscious or unconscious biases, right? And so you mentioned that about laws that were passed in the past where potentially there was not a lot of input from women or other members of our society. Do you think AI can be trained then to be truly neutral or will bias always be a challenge?  Benjamin: I wish I had the right answer. I think, I actually truly believe that bias is a very relative term. And in certain societies, bias has a very firm and black and white standing, whereas in other societies, it does not. Especially in international arbitration, where we not only deal with cross-border disputes, but different cultures, different laws, laws of the seats, laws of the contract. I think it's very hard to point out one set of bias that we will combat or that we will set as principle for everything. I think ultimately what ensures that there is always human oversight in the use of AI, especially in arbitration, are exactly these type of issues. So we can, of course, try to combat bias and gender bias and others. But I don't think it is as easy as we say, because even nowadays, in normal proceedings, we are still dealing with bias on a human level. So I think we cannot ask from machines to be less biased than we as humans are.  Rebeca: Let me pivot here a bit. And, you know, earlier, we mentioned the GAR Awards. And now I'd like to shift our focus to the recent GAR Life on Technology that took place here in New York last week on February 20th. And to give our audience, you know, some context. GAR stands for Global Arbitration Review, a widely read journal that not only ranks international arbitration practices at law firms worldwide, but also, among other things, organizes live conferences on cutting-edge topics in arbitration across the globe. So I know you were a speaker at GAR Live, and there was an important discussion about distinguishing generative AI, predictive AI, and other AI applications. How do these different AI technologies impact arbitration, and how do the SVAMC guidelines address them?  Benjamin: I was truly honored to speak at the GAR Live event in New York, and I think the fact that I was invited to speak on AI as a testament on how important AI is and how widely interested the community is in the use of AI, which is very different to 2023 when we were drafting the guidelines on the use of AI. I think it is important to understand that ultimately, everything in arbitration, specifically in arbitration, needs human oversight. But in using AI in arbitration, I think we need to differentiate on how the use of AI is different in arbitration versus other parts of the law, and specifically how it is different in arbitration compared to how we would use it on a day-to-day basis. In arbitration specifically, arbitrators are still responsible for a personal or arbitrators are given a personal mandate that is very different to how law works in general. Where you have a lot of judges that let their assistants draft parts of the decision, parts of the order. Arbitration is a little different, and that for a reason. Specifically in international arbitration, because there are certain sensitivities when it comes to local law, when it comes to an international standard and local standards. Arbitrators are held to a higher standard. Using AI as an arbitrator, for example, which could technically be put at the same level as using a tribunal secretary, has its limits. So I think that AI can be used in many aspects, from drafting for attorneys, for counsel, when it comes to helping prepare graphs, when it comes to preparing documents, accumulating documents, etc., etc. But it does have its limits when it comes to arbitrators using it. As we have tried to reiterate in the guidelines, arbitrators need to be very conscious of where their personal mandate starts and ends. In other words, our recommendation, again, we are soft law guidelines, our recommendation to arbitrators are to not use AI when it comes to any decision-making process. What does that mean? We don't know. And neither does the law. And every jurisdiction has their own definition of what that means. It is up for the arbitrator to define what a decision-making process is and to decide of whether the use of AI in that process is adequate.  Rebeca: Thank you so much, Ben. I want to now kind of pivot, since we've been talking a little bit more about the guidelines, I want to ask you a few questions about them. So they were created with a global perspective, right? And so what initiatives is the AI task force pursuing to ensure the guidelines remain relevant worldwide? You've been talking about different legal systems and local laws and how practitioners or certain regulations within certain jurisdictions might treat certain things differently. So what is the AI task force doing to remain relevant, to maybe create some sort of uniformity? So what can you tell me about that?  Benjamin: So we at the SVAMC task force, we continue to gather feedback, of course, And we're looking for global adaptation. We will continue to work closely with practitioners, with institutions, with lawmakers, with government, to ensure that when it comes to arbitration, AI is given a space, it's used adequately, and if possible, of course, and preferential to us, the SVAMC AI guidelines are used. That's why they were drafted, to be used. When we presented the guidelines to different committees and to different law sections and bar associations, it struck us that jurisdictions such as the U.S., and more specifically in New York, where both you and I are based, the community was not very open to receiving these guidelines as guidelines. And the suggestion was actually made to creating a white paper, And as much as it seemed to be a shutdown at an early stage, when we were thinking about it, and I was very blessed to have seven additional members in the Guidelines Drafting Committee, seven very bright individual members that I learned a lot from during this process. It was clear to us that jurisdictions such as New York have a very high ethical standard, and where guidelines such as our guidelines would potentially be seen as doubling ethical rules. So although we advocate for them not being ethical guidelines whatsoever, because we don't believe they are, we strongly suggest that local and international ethical standards are being upheld. So with that in mind, we realize that there is more to a global aspect that needs to be addressed rather than an aspect of law associations in the US or in the UK or now in Europe. Up-and-coming jurisdictions that up until now did not have a lot of exposure to artificial intelligence and maybe even technology as a whole are rising. And they may need more guidance than jurisdictions where technology may be an instinct away. So what the AI task force has created. And is continuing to recruit for, are regional committees for the AI Task Force, tracking AI usage in different legal systems and different jurisdictions. Our goal is to track AI-related legislation and its potential impact on arbitration. These regional committees will also provide jurisdiction-specific insights to refine the guidelines. And hopefully, or this is what we anticipate, these regional committees will help bridge the gap between AI's global development and local legal framework. There will be a dialogue. We will continue, obviously, to be present at conferences, to have open dialogue, and to recruit, of course, for these committees. But the next step is definitely to focus on these regional committees and to see how we, as the AI task force of the Silicon Valley Arbitration Mediation Center, can impact the use of AI in arbitration worldwide.  Rebeca: Well, that's very interesting. So you're utilizing committees in different jurisdictions to keep you appraised of what's happening in each jurisdiction. And then with that, continue, you know, somehow evolving the guidelines and gathering information to see how this field, you know, it's changing rapidly.  Benjamin: Absolutely. Initially, we were thinking of just having a small local committee to analyze different jurisdictions and what laws and what court cases, etc. But we soon came to realize that it's much more than tracking judicial decisions. We need people on the ground that are part of a jurisdiction, part of that local law, to tell us how AI impacts their day-to-day, how it may differ from yesterday to tomorrow, and what potential legislation will be enacted to either allow or disallow the use of certain AI.  Rebeca: That's very interesting. I think it's something that will keep the guidelines up to date and relevant for a long time. So kudos to you, the SVAMC and the task force. Now, I know that the guidelines are a very short paper, you know, and then in the back you have the commentary on them. So I want to, I'm not going to dissect all of the guidelines, but I want to come and talk about one of them in particular that I think created a lot of discussion around the guidelines itself. So for full disclosure, right, I was part of the reviewing committee of the AI guidelines. And I remember that one of the most debated aspects of the SVAMC AI guidelines is guideline three on disclosure, right? So should arbitrators and counsel disclose their AI use in proceedings? So I think that that has generated a lot of debates. And that's the reason why we have the resulting guideline number three, the way it is drafted. So can you give us a little bit more of insight what happened there?  Benjamin: Absolutely. I'd love to. Guideline three was very controversial from the get-go. We initially had two options. We had a two-pronged test that parties would either satisfy or not, and then disclosure was necessary. And then we had another option that the community could vote on where it was up to the parties to decide whether their AI-aided submission could impact the outcome of the case. And depending on that, they would disclose or not disclose whether AI was used. Quite frankly, that was a debate we had in 2023, and a lot changed from November 2023 until April, when we finally published the first version of the AI guidelines. A lot of courts have implemented an obligatory disclosure. I think people have also gotten more comfortable with using AI on a day-to-day. And we ultimately came to the conclusion to opt for a flexible disclosure approach, which can now be found in the guidelines. The reason for that was relatively simple, or relatively simple to us who debated that. Having a disclosure obligation of the use of AI will very easily become inefficient for two reasons. A blanket disclosure for the use of AI serves nobody. It really boils down to one question, which is, if the judge, or in our case in arbitration, if the arbitrator or tribunal knows that AI was used for a certain document, now what? How does that knowledge transform into action? And how does that knowledge lead to a different outcome? And in our analysis, it turned out that a blanket disclosure of AI usage, or in general, an over-disclosure of the use of AI in arbitration, may actually lead to adverse consequences for the parties who make the disclosure. Why? Because not knowing how AI can impact these submissions causes arbitrators not to know what to do with that disclosure. So ultimately, it's really up to the parties to decide, how was AI used? How can it impact the case? What is it I want to disclose? How do I disclose? It's also important for the arbitrators to understand, what do I do with the disclosure before saying, everything needs to be disclosed. During the GAR event in New York, the issue was raised whether documents which were prepared with the use of AI should be disclosed or whether there should be a blanket disclosure. And quite frankly, the debate went back and forth, but ultimately it comes down to cross-examination. It comes down to the expert or the party submitting the document, being able to back up where the information comes from rather than knowing that AI was used. And if you put that in aspect, we received a very interesting question of why we should continue using AI, knowing that approximately 30% of its output are hallucinations and it needs revamping. This was compared to a summer associate or a first-year associate, and the question was very simple. If I have a first-year associate or a summer associate whose output has a 30% error rate, why would I continue using that associate? And quite frankly, there is merit to the question, and it really has a very simple answer. And the answer is time and money. Using AI makes it much faster to receive using AI makes it faster to receive output than using a first year associate or summer associate and it's way cheaper. For that, it's worth having a 30% error margin. I don't know where they got the 30% from, but we just went along with it.  Rebeca: I was about to ask you where they get the 30%. And well, I think that for first-year associates or summer associates that are listening, I think that the main thing will be for them to then become very savvy in the use of AI so they can become relevant to the practice. I think everyone, you know, there's always that question about whether AI will replace all of us, the entire world, and we'll go into machine apocalypses. I don't see it that way. In my view, I see that if we, you know, if we train ourselves, if we're not afraid of using the tool, we'll very much be in a position to pivot and understand how to use it. And when you have, what is the saying, garbage in, garbage out. So if you have a bad input, you will have a bad output. You need to know the case. You need to know your documents to understand whether the machine is hallucinating or giving you, you know, an information that is not real. I like to play and ask certain questions to chat GPT, you know, here and there. And sometimes I, you know, I ask obviously things that I know the answer to. And then I'm like, chat GPT, this is not accurate. Can you check on this? And he's like, oh, thank you for correcting me. I mean, and it's just a way of, you got to try and understand it so you know where to make improvements. But that doesn't mean that the tool, because it's a tool, will come and replace, you know, your better judgment as a professional, as an attorney.  Benjamin: Absolutely. One of the things we say is it is a tool. It does nothing out of its own volition. So what you're saying is 100% right. This is what the SVAMC AI guidelines stand for. Practitioners need to accustom themselves on proper use of AI. AI can be used from paid versions to unpaid versions. We just need to understand what is an open source AI, what is a close circuit AI. Again, for whoever's listening, feel free to look up the guidelines. There's a lot of information there. There's tons of articles written at this point. And just be very mindful of if there is an open AI system, such as an unpaid chat GPT version. It does not mean you cannot use it. First, check with your firm to make sure you're allowed to use it. I don't want to get into any trouble.  Rebeca: Well, we don't want to put confidential information on an open AI platform.  Benjamin: Exactly. Once the firm or your colleagues allow you to use ChatGPT, even if it's an open version, just be very smart about what it is you're putting in. No confidential information, no potential conflict check, no potential cases. Just be smart about what it is you put in. Another aspect we were actually debating about is this hallucination. Just an example, let's say you say this is an ISDS case, so we're talking a little more public, and you ask Chad GPT, hey, show me all the cases against Costa Rica. And it hallucinates, too. It might actually be that somebody input information for a potential case against Costa Rica or a theoretical case against Costa Rica, Chad GPT being on the open end, takes that as one potential case. So just be very smart. Be diligent, but also don't be afraid of using it.  Rebeca: That's a great note to end on. AI is here to stay. And as legal professionals, it's up to us to ensure it serves the interests of justice, fairness, and efficiency. And for those interested in learning more about the SVAMC AI guidelines, you can find them online at svamc.org and search for guidelines. I tried it myself and you will go directly to the guidelines. And if you like to stay updated on developments in AI and arbitration, be sure to follow Tech Law Talks and join us for future episodes where we'll continue exploring the intersection of law and technology. Ben, thank you again for joining me today. It's been a great pleasure. And thank you to our listeners for tuning in.  Benjamin: Thank you so much, Rebeca, for having me and Tech Law Talks for the opportunity to be here.  Outro: Tech Law Talks is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's Emerging Technologies Practice, please email techlawtalks@reedsmith.com. You can find our podcasts on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts.  Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers.  All rights reserved. Transcript is auto-generated.

In today's episode, I read the actual decision of Arbitrator Nolan. He goes over the arguments that were made on both sides, which is pretty enlightening, and then details his decision.

After several months, the Arbitrators late Monday afternoon ruled in favor of the Lore and A-Rod duo to resume their final stretch towards owning the #Timberwolves. On the court, the team played incredibly well down the stretch vs Portland, and followed up with two doozies vs the Cavs and Bucks. #NBA #PodcastUse my referral link for the Crypto.com App:https://crypto.com/app/mt4ysj25P7 to sign up for Crypto.com and get $25!Vig It App Referral: Paladinolivefacebook.com/timberwolvesexplosionX: @TwolvesExhttps://www.youtube.com/@paladinolive⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠tiktok.com/@paladino.live⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram: timberwolves_explosionpaladinolive@yahoo.com

Federal civil rights enforcement in the employment area is handled by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC,) the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP,) and the Department of Justice (DOJ.) This webinar will explore efforts to coordinate enforcement by the three agencies and look at ways to avoid duplication of efforts to streamline and strengthen civil rights and equal employment opportunity enforcement in the United States. It will also look at recent efforts by the federal government to increase the presence of DEIA (diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility) programs in the federal sector and the public response to these developments.Featuring:Jon Greenbaum, Founder, Justice Legal Strategies PLLCProf. George R. La Noue, Professor Emeritus of Political Science and Professor Emeritus of Public Policy, University of Maryland Baltimore CountyCraig E. Leen, Partner, K&L Gates; Former Director, OFCCPHon. Jenny R. Yang, Adjunct Professor of Law, New York University School of Law; Former Director, OFCCP; Former Chair, EEOC(Moderator) Robert J. Gaglione, Arbitrator, American Arbitration Association; Former Deputy Director, OFCCP

Ep 137, Surface vs. Substance: Managing Workplace Disputes Wisely

J.P. Duffy is joined by Jeff Zaino, vice president of the AAA-ICDR's Commercial Division, to discuss the AAA's upcoming centenary and its enduring reputation as a trusted choice for resolving commercial conflicts across industries. The conversation delves into the AAA's significant milestones and accomplishments, highlighting its commitment to innovation, including its approach to AI and the recent appointment of Bridget McCormack as president and CEO. ----more---- Transcript: Intro: Hello and welcome to Arbitral Insights, a podcast series brought to you by our international arbitration practice lawyers here at Reed Smith. I'm Peter Rosher, Global Head of Reed Smith's International Arbitration Practice. I hope you enjoy the industry commentary, insights and anecdotes we share with you in the course of this series, wherever in the world you are. If you have any questions about any of the topics discussed, please do contact our speakers. And with that, let's get started.  J.P.: Welcome back to the next episode of Arbitral Insights, in which we'll discuss the American Arbitration Association with Jeff Zaino, who's the vice president of the AAA's commercial division. I'm J.P. Duffy. I'm an international arbitration partner based in New York that acts as both counsel and arbitrator in international arbitration seated around the world under a variety of governing laws and arbitral rules. I'm qualified in New York, England, and Wales in the DIFC courts in Dubai, where I previously lived and practiced. I routinely represent clients and arbitrations involving a range of issues and frequently sit as an arbitrator in commercial disputes as well. I also have the good fortune to be a member of the AAA's commercial division arbitrator roster, the ICDR panel, and I'm a member of the AAA-ICDR Life Sciences Steering Committee and a member of the ICDR Publications Committee as well. So I get to do a lot with the AAA, which is really a wonderful organization. As I mentioned, with me today is Jeff Zaino, who's the vice president of the commercial division of the AAA in New York. He oversees administration of the large, complex commercial caseload, user outreach, and panel of commercial neutrals in New York. He joined the association in 1990, and Mr. Zaino is dedicated to promoting ADR methods and services. He's also written and published extensively on the topics of electronic reform and ADR, including several podcasts with the ABA, talks on law, and corporate counsel business. And he's appeared on CNN, MSNBC, and Bloomberg to discuss national election reform efforts and the Help America Vote Act. He was deemed a 2018 Alternative Dispute Resolution Champion by the National Law Journal and received awards for his ADR work from the National Academy of Arbitrators, Region 2 and Long Island Labor and Employment Relations Association. In 2022, Jeff received the Alicott Lieber Younger Committee of the Year Award for the New York State Bar Association Commercial and Federal Litigation Section. And in 2023, the Chairman's Award, NYSBA Dispute Resolution Section. So as you can tell, Jeff is a highly experienced, highly lauded arbitration expert, but we're really lucky to have his valuable insights today. So before we begin with some of the substance, let me just give a little bit of background on the AAA and the commercial division so that those that are less familiar have a little bit of information about what we're going to discuss today. The AAA is a non-profit alternative dispute resolution service provider headquartered in New York that administers arbitrations, mediations, and other forms of dispute resolution, such as ombudsperson and dispute avoidance training. It was founded in 1926 to provide an alternative to civil court proceedings, and that makes the AAA one of the oldest arbitral institutions in the world, as well as one of the largest, having administered over 11,553 business-to-business cases in 2023 alone, with a total value of over $19.1 billion. So that should give you a pretty good idea of the scope of what the AAA does. Notably, the AAA has several divisions that offer users substantial subject matter expertise. For instance, the commercial division, which Jeff heads, specializes in business-to-business disputes of all sizes, but has a particular expertise with large complex cases across a variety of industries, including accounting, communications, energy, entertainment, financial services, franchise, hospitality, insurance and reinsurance, life sciences, sports, and technology. There are also separate AAA divisions that focus exclusively on construction issues, consumer disputes, employment matters, government issues, healthcare, and labor disputes. Lastly, as many of our listeners will know, the AAA has a well-known international division, the International Center for Dispute Resolution, or what's colloquially known as the ICDR, that focuses on disputes that have an international component. Before we get into some of our recent developments, Jeff, if you could tell us a bit about what makes the AAA different than other arbitral administrators, I'm sure our audience would love to hear that.  Jeff: Sure. Hey, thanks so much, J.P., for having me today, and thanks for the kind words at the beginning. It's great to be here today. Well, you mentioned it. The AAA is the largest and oldest ADR provider in the world. We have over 700 staff worldwide and 28 offices, including one in Singapore. And we have a huge panel, and you're on that panel. We have 6,000 arbitrators on our panel, and we consider them experts in the industry. And we're really proud of our panel. And like you mentioned, we're hitting our 100th anniversary in 2026. And since then, when I started, I started in the 90s, like you mentioned, 1990. From 1926, when we were founded, to 1990, we did a million cases, one million cases. And then, since then, from 1990 until now, 2024, we hit 8 million, 8 million cases. So it's growing. And I feel that's because of AAA, AAA-ICDR. Again, we've been around for almost 100 years, and we keep on growing. And I feel that we took the A out of ADR. I mean, everyone says alternative dispute resolution, but I really think now it's, and you'll probably agree with me, J.P., that it's dispute resolution. It's something in our toolbox and it's not alternative any longer. And then another thing about us, a huge difference about AAA-ICDR is we're not for profit. That makes us unique in this space. Profit-based companies are a little bit different than what we are. We're not criticizing them, but we're unique in the sense that we work directly for the parties, not for the arbitrators.  J.P.: That's a really interesting stat, Jeff. Let me unpack some of that because I think, first off, if I understood that correctly, you said up until 1990, there were 1 million cases administered. Is that right?  Jeff: That's correct. We did 1 million cases from our founding, 1926, a year after the Federal Arbitration Act in 1925. So we did 1 million when I came on board in 1990. And then from 1990 until now, we've done a total of 8 million. So we doubled that, or tripled it. It's been amazing how the growth that we've seen. And also during a pandemic, we saw a huge growth at AAA-ICDR.  J.P.: And Jeff, one thing that I think you're obviously very involved with the New York State Bar, and I've done quite a bit with the New York State Bar myself over the years. One thing that I noticed, and you just reminded me of this, was an uptick in submission agreements during the pandemic, by which I mean parties taking existing disputes for which there was no arbitration clause, drafting an arbitration clause for it to submit it and move it into arbitration. And I think some of that was a function of the recognition that disputes would founder if the courts were closed and that parties needed things done. Did you see that kind of growth during the pandemic of submission agreements as well?  Jeff: Absolutely. The courts were shut down, like you mentioned, for three to four months worldwide. And the ADR providers, like the AAA-ICDR, did not shut down. And we did have submissions, more submissions than we've ever seen. And usually it's only about, I would say, 2%, 3% of our caseload is submissions, but we saw the court systems. And I had, personally, I had over a billion dollar case, a bankruptcy case that came to us from Texas and it was mediated. We had two mediators, one in Connecticut and one in Texas. We had six parties, 40 people showed up on the Zoom, J.P., it was amazing. And that was a submission to AAA through the court system. The judge talked to the parties and said, listen, we're shut down. This is an important matter. Why don't you go to AAA? And so, yes, we did see submissions during the pandemic. I'm not sure if that's going to continue on. Most of our disputes are features of contract, as you know.  J.P.: Yeah. I mean, that's always going to be the case in arbitration, right? That the vast majority of cases will be subject to a pre-dispute arbitration clause. But I think it's really interesting when you see submission agreements like that, because I think it's a clear recognition that one, arbitration is a really valuable tool. And two, it's a real plus for the AAA and a real nod of confidence that those are submitted to AAA because that's parties taking something they know has to be figured out and saying, all right, AAA is the guy to do. I wanted to pick up, too, on that exponential growth of 8 million cases between 1990 and the present versus 1 million over the first, you know, what is that, 70-something years or 60-plus years?  Jeff: 60-plus years, absolutely, yeah. J.P.: Are there particular industries that you've seen significant growth in since the 1990 period that you were discussing, like between 1990 and the present? Are there particular industries that you are seeing more growth in or that you think there could be more growth in? Just be curious to get your views on that.  Jeff: Sure, sure. And my area of commercial, as you know, because you're on the commercial panel and the ICDR panel, is healthcare. And I know you're a big part of healthcare. Also, financial services. We've seen a huge growth in that in the last five years. We put together an advisory committee for financial services on insurance. And then also, as you probably know, consumer. We saw a big amount of consumer cases during the pandemic and even prior to the pandemic. And that's a big caseload. It's about 30% of our caseload at AAA-ICDR. But again, people criticize that sometimes and say, well, that's not fair to the consumer. They're forced into arbitration. But what I say, J.P., to law students and when I speak at events like this, I say, listen, we don't draft ourselves into contracts. AAA-ICDR does not do that. People draft us into contracts and we just try to make the process, we try to level the playing field. And we do a lot of consumer, but we do a lot of high-end commercial cases, as you know, a lot of international cases and things like that. But the two areas, I would say, a long way to answer to your question, J.P., is I would say healthcare and financial services, insurance, that's where we're seeing a lot of growth and also technology.  J.P.: The consumer aspect is one that is obviously very, very, very hot right now, given things like the mass arbitration rules and things like that. And we will probably touch on that in a bit, but it's a really valuable service to provide. And that's one thing that I think the AAA really does well. As you mentioned, it's a not-for-profit organization. It's not an organization that's out to make money off of consumer disputes. It's really there to help everybody resolve them. So something for everyone to keep in mind.  Jeff: The company bears the cost, not the consumer. And I hope people know that, that we're not out, like you said, we're not out to make a big buck on this. We're just trying to level a playing field and access to justice for these people.  J.P.: Yeah. And that's really what it is. At the end of the day, it's access to justice. And a lot of times the alternative is small claims court, which is not always a great choice. I've sat as an arbitrator in small claims court a few times, and I can tell you it's a great process when it works, but it can be a challenging process as well so  Jeff: Without a doubt.  J.P.: Always something to keep in mind. Yeah. Well, let's talk then about some of the recent developments because there have been quite a few. And as you mentioned, it's coming up on the centennial for the AAA-ICDR. And a lot has happened, obviously, in the 100 years of its existence, almost 100 years of its existence.  Jeff: Sure.  J.P.: And quite a few of those things are pretty monumental. And one of the biggest ones, I guess, is that in February 2023. Bridget McCormack took over as president and CEO of the AAA-ICDR from India Johnson, who was in that role for a lot of years. Bridget was previously the chief justice of the Michigan Supreme Court, if I'm correct, and was also a professor and associate dean at the prestigious University of Michigan Law School. So she brings a pretty extensive wealth of experience to the AAA. Now that she's been in that role for about a year and a half, how have things been different at the AAA-ICDR under Bridget's leadership?  Jeff: It's been wonderful. I mean, Bridget brings such life to the company right now. I mean, India Johnson was great. She put our house in order, our finances. but Bridget is now doing a wonderful job in getting out there. I'm not sure, J.P., have you met her yet?  J.P.: I have not had the pleasure of meeting her in person, but I'll sort of preview for our listeners that we are in the process of trying to get Bridget into our firm to talk to everyone about what the AAA-ICDR does and give sort of an insider's view for our partners.  Jeff: Oh, wonderful. She's such a dynamic speaker. If you go on YouTube, you'll see she speaks all the time. It's amazing. Whenever I ask her to speak at an event in New York, I feel bad about asking her because I know how busy she is, but she does agree. But I have to find a space in her calendar because if you see on LinkedIn, I know you're on LinkedIn too, J.P., and she is everywhere. It seems like every week she's speaking somewhere, very dynamic, and she embraces AI. And I know we're going to talk about AI a little bit, but also innovation. And she's been doing such a terrific job being the face of the AAA, and we needed that. India, again, did a wonderful job, but Bridget is out there and around the world doing international events, doing events here domestically. And it really, I think, is getting the word out there about ADR and about, well, I should say DR, sorry, dispute resolution, and also access to justice. Being a former chief justice of the Supreme Court of Michigan, doing a terrific job. And really, the people in the company are very excited. We have 700 plus employees, and we're excited with our new president. It really has been a great time with her.  J.P.: You know it's funny. The one thing I've universally heard from anyone who works there when I ask about Bridget is everyone says great energy, great leadership, and really, really, really strong presence, which is really wonderful to hear because you seem to be echoing that pretty strongly as well.  Jeff: Yeah, without a doubt. I mean, when she works a room, when she talks at an event, and it's great. We're forward-looking right now, big time. The AAA now is looking, AAA-ICDR, looking towards the future with innovation, with ODR, and we're going to talk about that, and with access to justice, which I love. And she's doing a terrific job.  J.P.: Well, that's great to hear. And I think we are going to talk about odr.com in just a second. But before we do that, I'd just be curious, because they may well be the same thing. But what would you say Bridget's greatest accomplishment is so far?  Jeff: I would say being the face of the AAA and embracing new ideas. For years, we didn't really, we moved kind of slowly. We embraced new ideas, but we moved slowly like a battleship turning around or an aircraft carrier turning around. We moved slowly. We're not doing that any longer. Bridget wants to move on quickly, which is great, and embrace things that are going on. And I think we're ahead of the curve on a lot of things, with acquiring ODR, with our embracing AI, with her ideas about innovation, access to justice. We are, I think, really ahead of the curve with respect to these areas, ahead of law firms, ahead of some of our competitors. And I attribute that to Bridget.  J.P.: That's really great to hear. That's really great to hear. And it's really hard with a large organization to be nimble. Exactly. I know we do that pretty well at Reed Smith, I think, too, but it's a challenge, and it does require great leadership in order to get everybody on board with that. So it's wonderful to hear that's happening at the AAA-ICDR, and you see it.  Jeff: Oh, yeah, without a doubt. And also, we're almost 100-year-old organizations, so you would think that we wouldn't be thinking about these innovation things in the future, but we are, which is terrific. We're an old organization, but not really. We're ready for the future.  J.P.: Well, let's talk about that future a bit because it's clear that there's a strong focus on that. And one of the first things that I noticed is the odr.com resourceful internet solutions acquisition. So for those that don't know anything about that, maybe you could fill the audience in and give us a bit of background about that one and what it's done for the AAA-ICDR.  Jeff: Sure. We just recently, a few months ago, acquired odr.com. It's a company that's been around for approximately 25 years. Online dispute resolution that can be completely customized for your needs for online dispute resolution. And they've been doing a wonderful job for many years. Okay. obviously much smaller than the AAA-ICDR, but they've been working with us. I'm not sure if you know this, J.P., but they've helped us with our no-fault business in New York. They help us set up our system initially years ago. So we've had a relationship with them for probably two decades with ODR. So we recently acquired them and we're working with them. Their most important area is right now is mediation. They have mediate.com and we're looking at  our mediation.org and combining those two. Okay. And we want to expand our mediation business. And again, I mentioned it a couple of times, access to justice. We want high volume cases. Okay. We do obviously high-end cases, high dollar cases, but right now we're seeing with odr.com, we can spread the business, we can grow the business and we can expand our mediation business. And that's what we're trying to do because mediation is growing. As you know, J.P., it's it mediation has grown tremendously over the last couple of decades. But now with ODR online dispute resolution, I mean, it's going to really grow, I think. So that's what that's why we acquired it. And, you know, Colin Rule, I'm not sure, J.P., if you've ever met Colin Rule. The head of ODR.com.  J.P.: I have not had the pleasure.  Jeff: Yeah, he's he's phenomenal. know if anyone that's listening to this podcast, you just Google Colin Rule. He's been in this space for many, many years and he's a phenomenal person. And I'm really excited about this acquisition. And I think we're going to work so well together.  J.P.: Jeff, just for people like me that are a little bit less savvy with how some of these things work technologically and sort of mechanically, is odr.com and mediate.com is a function of that, right? Or a part of that?  Jeff: Yeah, it's a part of it. Yeah. And I believe they have arbitration.com, but now it's going to be merged in with the AAA. And the platform of odr.com is going to be used for our mediation services at AAA for online mediation services.  J.P.: Okay. That's what I was getting at. So this is like a platform where users or parties and the mediator all log in, communicate with each other. Exchange their positions, and do everything that way. So is it correct to say it's sort of a virtual mediation platform?  Jeff: Yeah, without a doubt. And now the timing is perfect, J.P., because we just came off the pandemic about a couple of years ago, and we were seeing, as you probably know, as an arbitrator at AAA, we were doing thousands of virtual hearings arbitration and also mediation, and it worked. It really worked.  J.P.: Yeah. And that's really one of the true benefits that came out of the pandemic, in my view. Prior to the pandemic, I had always done certain aspects of cases virtually. And there was video conferencing was something that you could suggest, but that parties and frankly, arbitrators were not always that willing to embrace. But I think the pandemic really showed everyone that you can do things virtually. Efficiently, cost-effectively, and in a way that you don't need an in-person hearing for, and that it can be really successful. So I'm sure the timing has been right for odr.com and that acquisition. In terms of integrating it, what's the full timeline for getting it fully integrated, if you don't mind my asking?  Jeff: Sure. I mean, right now we're focusing on mediation. Okay. That's going to be our focus for the next several months. And then I think we're going to try to see if we can move this into arbitration also, because we're still seeing a lot of arbitrations, not a lot. I mean, I would say that 30% of our arbitrations are still being done in the virtual world. We're starting to see, and JP you've been at my Midtown office in Midtown Manhattan on 42nd Street, and we're starting to see about 60 to 70% capacity as an in-person for arbitration. But there's still a segment that wants to do it in the virtual world. And this is where odr.com comes into play. And right now it's, but the focus right now is mediation and working with our mediation team at the AAA-ICDR.  J.P.: Got it. Well, you know, it's funny. I have an employment partner who told me the odds of them ever doing an employment mediation below a certain value in person again are slim to none.  Jeff: Interesting.  J.P.: Yeah. And I think you guys have really hit the nail on the head with this.  Jeff: Well, with labor similar to employment, we're seeing almost 80% of labor cases now in New York City, I'm talking, are being done virtual, maybe even a little bit more than that. They got so used to doing it in the virtual world for labor cases, union management. It's interesting to see where we're going with this. But commercial type disputes, the type that you handle, J.P., we're starting to see more people coming back into in-person. However, we're not seeing the days of a witness flying in from Paris for one hour because we have all the technology at the offices, our offices around the country, the voice activated camera. So we don't need to ship in people for one hour. It's a waste of money.  J.P.: Yeah. And that's, you know, that's really the great thing that this technology allows for, which is, you know, I just did a, to mention the hearing space, Jeff, I just did a pretty large week-long hearing earlier in the year at the AAA's offices on 42nd Street. And it was great, but there were, you know, and I do, you know, myself prefer in-person for certain things, but, you know, during that hearing, we had witnesses that were exactly what you're describing, I mean, really only required to confirm a few issues or give, you know, a short cross examination and they were located in pretty diverse regions. Absolutely no reason to incur the time or expense or frankly, just the headache of bringing those people in from around the world for scheduling purposes and everything else.  Jeff: Sure.  J.P.: We did those, you know, we did those witnesses virtually and that is a real, that's a real benefit. You know, you sort of do that hybrid approach and you can save, it's way more efficient, It's way more cost-effective, and it is just easier from a scheduling perspective. So this is a really great development.  Jeff: Yeah, and J.P., have you noticed, I mean, when you were probably at my office on 42nd Street, we have now the big monitors. And I've noticed that arbitrators like yourself and advocates like yourself are using more technology in the rooms. We have these cupboards in our hearing rooms where the binders used to go, the big binders for exhibits and things like that. No longer am I seeing that. Most arbitrators are now using our, we provide iPads, we have the big monitors, and it seems like people are going away from paper, which is great too.  J.P.: Yeah, it's funny. I'm sort of like probably the last of the Mohicans where people really had to do things like mini books. Like when I was a real junior associate, we would have hearing bundles that were in mini book form and they were, you'd have 55 volumes and everything would be in there. I mean, there's sort of those nightmare stories where parties would spend hundreds of thousands of dollars just pulling together the paper for a hearing. And that, you know, that to me always seemed a little bit crazy. In this day and age, it is totally unnecessary. I would much prefer to have everything electronically. And that hearing space really allows for that. So really, really great to hear that parties are embracing that because it's such a cost savings and it's an efficiency. You know, it just doesn't need to be the way it was.  Jeff: Sure.  J.P.: Well, let's talk then a bit about some of the AI stuff that you were mentioning, because I think that is really, I have to confess, I don't understand it as well as I should. I think most people, if they were being honest, probably have an inkling of what it does, but don't really know. I'd love to hear what the AAA-ICDR is doing with AI, because it's a really, really, really groundbreaking development.  Jeff: Absolutely. Well, if you Google Bridget McCormack, our president, she speaks on AI quite frequently and it really has embraced it. And how have we embraced that AAA? Well, she encourages the staff to use it. And we have, she's even recommended certain programs that we should use. But with respect to how are we using it with respect to running our business? Well, we have ClauseBuilder and you know about ClauseBuilder. It's a tool that was developed in 2013 where people can go online and develop a clause for arbitration. Now we have ClauseBuilder AI, which as opposed to going through various modules with the original ClauseBuilder, you can just type in, I want an employment clause. I want three arbitrators. I want limited discovery. And the clause builder AI will build that clause for you. That's something we just rolled out. Also for arbitrators, scheduling orders. We have an AI program right now for arbitrators where a scheduling order usually takes an arbitrator, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, J.P., usually about an hour to two hours after you do the preliminary hearing. Well, now AI reduces that time to probably a couple of minutes for an arbitrator. So we rolled that out. And we obviously were having discussions about low dollar cases, high volume cases. Can AI be used? And we're looking into that. We haven't rolled that out yet. It's not going to eliminate you, J.P., but it's something that we're looking at right now. And we are embracing it. I use it for various things. I'll give you an example. I use it for if I'm doing an educational program, I'll type in, you know, I'm doing a program on arbitration and discovery. Can you give me a good title for this program? I've been doing this for years. I've used a lot of different titles for programs, and it's wonderful to use AI for those purposes and for editing things. So I like the fact that our company embraces it. Some companies do not. Some law firms, as you know, J.P., do not embrace AI. And we had that case last year where I think an attorney, it wasn't arbitration, it was litigation, where he cited cases through AI that never existed.  J.P.: Yeah, that's actually happened more than once since then. And it's been kind of amazing to me. Yeah, it's funny. We as a law firm at Reed Smith have definitely embraced AI. We've got a person who's sort of C-suite level that addresses that and that heads that function up. And I know we are trying to bring it in much more for things that are sort of routine, that don't require necessarily true attorney time. And it is a real game changer. I mean, you know, anybody who doesn't get on board with AI is going to get left behind at some point because it is truly, truly the wave of the future, in my view.  Jeff: Oh, absolutely. And the way I look at it, people say, well, it seems scary or whatever. But what about Google Maps and things that we've embraced years ago? I couldn't live, J.P., without Google Maps. So that's technology that it's going to help us. It's not going to take us over or whatever. It's going to help us enhance what we're doing.  J.P.: Yeah, I think the concerns about Skynet are a little bit, you know, Skynet and Terminator are a little bit far-fetched, but it is something that we all need to get on board with. It's a lot like the way that, you know, when I first started practicing the notion of uploading paper documents to be reviewed and then using search terms was really scary for a lot of people, but that, you know, that became commonplace and you couldn't function without it. This will do the same thing to the extent it's not the same. Now, Jeff, what's the overlap, if any, between that you see between some of the AI initiatives and odr.com?  Jeff: We're not really combining those yet, but I think we will. There's discussions about it, but right now we're focusing on mediation with odr.com and we're discussing rolling out AI with various things to help to assist our arbitrators, are mediators, but I think eventually, you know, there'll be a combination, I think, but right now there's not.  J.P.: Got it. Well, we'll stay tuned because I can't imagine those two things are going to stay in separate houses for too long. Well, we could talk all day about what's going on at the AAA-ICDR right now because it's just amazing. I mean, it's really incredibly, incredibly dynamic at the moment. But what I'd like to do is sort of shift ahead to looking ahead to the future. We talked a bit earlier about how the AAA is rapidly approaching its centennial anniversary, And that's kind of a natural reflection point for any organization. If you were to sort of sum things up and say, what accomplishments from its first century of existence that the AAA is most proud of, what do you think you would point to?  Jeff: Well, I would point to two things. First, how amazing the AAA-ICDR was and also other ADR providers. When pandemic hit, within a week, we were up with 700 employees doing thousands and thousands of cases. And I was worried about the arbitrators, not you, J.P., but other arbitrators with the technology. And our 6,000 arbitrators, it was flawless. It was amazing or seamless. It really went well. And that I'm very, very proud of because I had been with the AAA for a long time prior to that. And I was really concerned that the arbitrators weren't going to get it. We weren't going to be able to understand Microsoft Teams, Zoom, all that kind of stuff. So we did a great job during pandemic. We had some of our best years during pandemic with respect to helping society in arbitrating cases. But also some of the things that we've done for state and federal governments, you know, state and federal governments, Storm Sandy, Katrina. Those are the things I'm very proud of. I was a part of the Storm Sandy stuff where we administered 6,000 cases for homeowners and with insurance companies. And we were able to do that very quickly. And we're a not-for-profit. So the federal government and the state governments look at us and will hire us to do those kind of projects. And we can quickly mobilize because of our staff. So those two things really stand out in my career at AAA.  J.P.: That's a really, really interesting thing to point to because that truly embodies the best that the AAA can offer. It's an incredible service that really helped people with real-life issues during really challenging times. So wonderful to hear. What would you see for the next 100 years in the AAA? Like, you know, looking forward, I know it's going to be here for, it's going to be having its two, it's bicentennial at some point. It will absolutely occur. What would you see is, you know, if you were to fast forward yourself a hundred years and still be in the seat, because by then technology will have kept us all alive for the next hundred years, and you're Jeff Zaino 2.0, sitting around in 200 years, where would you see the AAA-ICDR at that point?  Jeff: Well, I'm on part of the committee for the 100-year anniversary. We have a committee already formed two years in advance to get ready for our 100th year anniversary, and we're talking about this stuff. And I think some of the themes that Bridget's talking about, access to justice, I think we're going to be, we saw from 1990 to now 8 million cases, we're going to see far more. We're going to see the public now embracing arbitration. When I was hired by the AAA in the 90s, I didn't even know what AAA stood for. I mean, with the name, American Arbitration Association. I didn't know what arbitration was. We are reaching out to law schools. We're doing collaboration with a lot of law schools in New York and throughout the country, throughout the world. And I think the word's going to get out there that arbitration is the way to go. Our mediation is too. And I'm excited about that. Also, we're going to see far more diversity at AAA and also in the community. And that's something that we really care about at the AAA. Right now, J.P., as you probably know, any list that goes out at the AAA is a minimum of 30% diverse. So we're going to see an increase in that area, but also access to justice for the public.  J.P.: Really, really great. And I think we will all watch with rapt attention to see what happens because it's only good things in the future for the AAA-ICDR, that's for sure. Well, Jeff, I just want to thank you. But before we wrap this up, I'm going to reserve my right to bring you back for another podcast because there's so much more we could talk about. So, but is there anything I missed that we should hit on now that would be great for the audience to hear? I know there's just so much going on.  Jeff: Well, I hope the audience when in 2026, when we have our 100th anniversary, I hope people participate in it because we're going to do things worldwide and we're going to be doing events everywhere. And that year we really are, we have a huge team of people that are working in our 100th year anniversary and not to just necessarily promote AAA-ICDR, but to promote arbitration and mediation. And that's what we're going to be doing in 2026, and I'm very excited about it.  J.P.: You heard it here first, folks. Arbitration is the future. And Jeff said it himself. So we will definitely watch closely. Well, good. And just to give a very quick preview on this one, too, because Jeff, you mentioned it. We are going to, in the future, have your colleagues from the ICDR side of the house come on, and we're going to bring some of the new folks from Singapore and a few other people. So more to come. And it's just incredible to see.  Jeff: We look forward to it. And J.P., I'd love to have another sit down with you. It's been great.  J.P.: Good. We absolutely will. So that then will conclude our discussion at the American Arbitration Association for now. And I want to thank our guest, Jeff Zaino of the AAA Commercial Division for his invaluable insights. And I want to thank you, the audience, for listening today. You should feel free to reach out to Reed Smith about today's podcast with any questions you might have. And you should absolutely as well feel free to reach out to Jeff. I know he's super responsive and he would love to chat with you directly if you have any questions. And we look forward to having you tune in for future episodes of the series, including future updates with Jeff and our podcast with the ICDR as well. So thank you everyone. And we will be back.  Outro: Arbitral Insights is a Reed Smith production. Our producers are Ali McCardell and Shannon Ryan. For more information about Reed Smith's global international arbitration practice, email arbitralinsights@reedsmith.com. To learn about the Reed Smith Arbitration Pricing Calculator, a first-of-its-kind mobile app that forecasts the cost of arbitration around the world, search Arbitration Pricing Calculator on reedsmith.com or download for free through the Apple and Google Play app stores. You can find our podcast on podcast streaming platforms, reedsmith.com, and our social media accounts at Reed Smith LLP.  Disclaimer: This podcast is provided for educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and is not intended to establish an attorney-client relationship, nor is it intended to suggest or establish standards of care applicable to particular lawyers in any given situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any views, opinions, or comments made by any external guest speaker are not to be attributed to Reed Smith LLP or its individual lawyers.  All rights reserved.  Transcript is auto-generated.

Gautam Bhattacharyya welcomes Eunice Shang-Simpson (arbitrator, mediator, and lecturer-practitioner) to discuss her career journey, including key roles as a prosecutor, policy advisor, and practitioner. They explore her career highlights, transformational moments, and inspirations, before discussing the challenges and opportunities for improving parity and access in the legal profession, and how the industry can evolve to support future legal professionals.

Mélida Hodgson Careers in international arbitration will usually span the globe.  Across locations, cultures, industries and employers.  Mélida Hodgson has seen all of that in her career as an international practitioner and arbitrator.   On this week's episode she gives great insights and tips for jr. practitioners, LLM students and those actively practicing in the commercial arbitration space.  We also talk about the importance of diversity at a time where there are on-going role of DEI initiatives across the professional landscape.  Its a great conversation that I think you'll enjoy!   ARBBalance Event on Imposter Syndrome: Register here or via the QR Code on the flyer: https://lnkd.in/dGbPk9KF   ARB-Tech: https://www.arbtech.io/podcast  Time Stamps:   Opening Notes - :36 Interview Begins - 2:00 Personal Interest - 49:01 Closing Notes - 1:08:35   Books: @ 54:50 Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow  En Agosto Now Vemos by Gabriel García Márquez Music: @ 57:35 Panamanian Music Classical Music Fleetwood Mac Beyonce   Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/40833847/admin/   Check out our website: TalesOfTheTribunal.com   For Feedback, comments or submissions contact TalesOfTheTribunal@Gmail.com None of the views shared today or any episode of Tales of the Tribunal is presented as legal advice nor advice of any kind.  No compensation was provided to any organization or party for their inclusion on the show nor do any of the statements made represent any particular organization, legal position or view point.  All interviewees or organizations included appear on an arms-length basis and their appearance should not be construed as any bias or preferred affiliation with the host or host's employer.  All rights reserved.

In 1984, Kris Thorsness brought home gold in the U.S. women's 8+ from the Olympic Games Los Angeles. Home was Alaska, where she was welcomed with a parade and the distinction of being the first Alaskan to win an Olympic medal. Today she says she's “just a masters rower,” but 40 years after that gold medal Olympic performance, she's also a USRowing Referee and is an Arbitrator for the Court of Arbitration for Sport and the U.S. and Paralympic Committee. Before she heads off to Paris for the 2024 Olympics in her role as an Arbitrator, we talk with Kris about refereeing, which is often glossed over by rowers but is key to ensuring regattas are safe and effectively run, with a focus on sportsmanship. QUICK LOOK 00:00 - Welcome and Episode lead-In  01:34 - The Huddle 03:00 - Rowing Week 04:55 - The Hot Seat Q&A 06:30 - Favorite part of refereeing: the chase boat 08:57 - Favorite place to referee 09:40 - Challenges of referees and a lack of funding isn't helping with bringing new refs down the pipeline 16:59 - Rowing Origin: walking on at the University of Wisconsin (Go Badgers!) 20:04 - Grit, coming back from behind, and being eager to go into the pain cave 23:36 - Accepting the pain and getting gold at the 1984 Olympic Games L.A. 26:04 - Advice for rowers aspiring towards the Olympics 30:44 - A pair of tan pants and a blue Oxford shirt got Kris started as a referee 31:55 - The process of becoming a USRowing referee 35:35 - What you need to understand about race officials 36:11 - Sassing the referees 38:30 - As an arbitrator for the Court of Arbitration for Sport, what types of cases *might* Kris handle at the Olympic Games Paris? 41:54 - Are there any doping concerns in Olympic rowing? 43:10 - As an IOC delegate, Kris has an all access pass to the events … if she has time to go 44:28 - Making the pitch to new potential referees 46:37 - SSN Events & Announcements . To see photos of Kris Thorsness, and get links to the people, clubs, and events mentioned in this episode, check out the show notes on our website. . This episode was made possible in part by Live2Row Studios, Breakwater Realty, RowSource, and our Patrons. . Steady State Podcast is written, produced, hosted, and edited by Rachel Freedman and Tara Morgan. Tara provides additional audio engineering and is our sponsor coordinator. Rachel manages the website, social media, and e-newsletter. Our theme music is by Jonas Hipper.

  Dr. Dorothee Scrhamm, Arbitrator   Giving people platforms is what we're all about here at Tales of the Tribunal, which is exactly the reason we were excited to give a platform to someone who is giving others a platform.  Dr. Dorothee Schramm is one of the co-founders of The The Global Tribunal Secretary Platform, a new initiative meant to give greater transparency and exposure to the tribunal secretary platform.  She is also a active independent arbitrator and is active in commercial and technology spaces across the globe.  We caught up during the ICCA Congress for a fun and candid conversation.  Check it out! Dorothee Schramm Arbitrator Website: https://swissarbitrator.com/    The Tribunal Secretary Platform: https://jusconnect.com/en/tribunalsecretaryplatform    Time Stamps:   Opening Notes - :40 Interview Begins - 2:46 Personal Interest - 39:05 Closing Notes - 51:40   Books: @ 43:40 First Man in Rome by Colleen McCullough  The All Souls Trilogy by Deborah Harkness Music: @ 44:40 Radio Paradise Shearwater Nada Surf   Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/40833847/admin/   Check out our website: TalesOfTheTribunal.com   For Feedback, comments or submissions contact TalesOfTheTribunal@Gmail.com None of the views shared today or any episode of Tales of the Tribunal is presented as legal advice nor advice of any kind.  No compensation was provided to any organization or party for their inclusion on the show nor do any of the statements made represent any particular organization, legal position or view point.  All interviewees or organizations included appear on an arms-length basis and their appearance should not be construed as any bias or preferred affiliation with the host or host's employer.  All rights reserved.

Originally broadcast: Friday, July 21, 2023ESG #15: Treaties and international tribunals interpreting and applying those treaties can impact how governments behave and how companies invest, bringing about concrete effects in the real world. Today, international courts are being summoned to answer questions about responsibility and liability for climate change impacts under international law. In December 2022, the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law asked the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea for an advisory opinion. In March 2023, the UN General Assembly asked the ICJ for an advisory opinion on state responsibilities to mitigate climate change. The decisions of these panels could have far-reaching effects, influencing climate change litigation in regional tribunals and national courts. They will shape and maybe accelerate global initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to adapt to climate change, and to compensate for losses and damages. In this newest episode, Milbank partner Viren Mascarenhas speaks with host Allan Marks about what's at stake in international climate change litigation. They discuss the potential impact of international climate change litigation decisions on economic policies and environmental laws, and explore the complex interrelationships among international courts, multilateral treaties and bilateral investment treaties. About the Speakers Viren Mascarenhas is a partner in Milbank's NY office and a member of the firm's Litigation & Arbitration Group. He specializes in international arbitration, public international law, and business and human rights. He has nearly two decades of experience acting as counsel in domestic and international arbitration proceedings under the major institutional arbitral rules as well as ad hoc arbitral rules in a broad range of industries, including chemicals, energy (LNG, oil, nuclear, electricity, power, renewables), and mining and metals. He teaches international arbitration at Columbia Law School, is a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, sits as arbitrator, and has been recognized for his accomplishments in the field by the major directories, including Chambers and Legal 500. Podcast host Allan Marks is one of the world's leading project finance lawyers. He advises developers, investors, lenders, and underwriters around the world in the development and financing of complex energy and infrastructure projects, as well as related acquisitions, restructurings and capital markets transactions. Many of his transactions relate to ESG and sustainability, innovative clean technologies, and sophisticated contractual risk allocation.For more information and insights, follow us on social media and podcast platforms, including Apple, Spotify, Amazon Music, iHeart, Google and Audible.Disclaimer

In this episode, Steve Fretzin and John Sciaccotta discuss:Building relationships everywhere you go. Connecting authentically and building trust in the community. The time of building relationships and expected outcomes. Breaking out of the billable hour hampster wheel. Controlling your destiny.  Key Takeaways:Get active, get involved, and maintain friendships within the legal practice. Wherever you have a relationship, give them a business card and tell them what you do. Tell them to think of you first. Make significant touches every single day - social media will allow you to do that easier than ever before. Step one is to be a great lawyer. But that's not all there is to building your own business. You will need to understand more about business and sales than law school has led you to believe. It is never too early to start learning networking, relationships, and non-verbal communication. They are the ingredients to success as a human being, as well as in your law firm.  "Life is about needs. If you can identify the need of a potential client or a referral source, and you can fulfill that need, you're going to get what you want." —  John Sciaccotta Take the BE THAT LAWYER challenge at Fretzin.com/BTLChallenge! Thank you to our Sponsors!Lawmatics: https://www.lawmatics.com/bethatlawyer/Get Staffed Up: https://getstaffedup.com/bethatlawyer/ Episode References: Start with Why Series by Simon Sinek - https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07VVJF819 About John Sciaccotta: John C. Sciaccotta has more than 37 years of trial and litigation experience advocating for clients in complex civil litigation, arbitration, mediation and business counseling matters with a special emphasis on complex civil trial and appellate cases brought in federal and state courts and tribunals throughout the United States. John represents publicly and privately held domestic and foreign business entities, business owners, lenders, employers, municipalities, government bodies and individuals in transactional matters and disputes, which include: Counseling and advocating for business entities and their owners in disputes involving Business Divorce issues, including corporate control, valuation, corporate squeeze-outs, minority oppression, dissolution actions and breaches of fiduciary duty and business tort claims. In addition, John has been appointed as a Neutral Arbitrator and Mediator for many years to resolve and arbitrate business-related disputes. He serves on the Commercial Panel of the American Arbitration Association's National Roster of Arbitrators. Connect with John Sciaccotta:  Website: https://www.agdglaw.com/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-c-sciaccotta-7472535Twitter: https://x.com/ScilawFacebook: https://facebook.com/JohncsciaccottaInstagram: https://instagram.com/jcscilaw   Connect with Steve Fretzin:LinkedIn: Steve FretzinTwitter: @stevefretzinInstagram: @fretzinsteveFacebook: Fretzin, Inc.Website: Fretzin.comEmail: Steve@Fretzin.comBook: Legal Business Development Isn't Rocket Science and more!YouTube: Steve FretzinCall Steve directly at 847-602-6911  Show notes by Podcastologist Chelsea Taylor-Sturkie Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it. 

1. Why should we think about the conscience and what is it? 2. Why is there such ambiguity in thinking about the conscience? 3. Why did the church give so much attention to the conscience in the past? 4. Why the conscience is important in the counseling context. Click here to see the booklet by Dr. Stephens, Fighting Same-Sex Desire. Thank you for your prayers!

He set out to write a resource book that was not sharply for one side or the other. In doing so he found one of the sides had no Biblical support. Now he is a balanced advocate for the mutualist or biblical egalitarian interpretation of the Bible. And he can explain why in detail!Andrew Bartlett is a popular speaker and author of Men and Women in Christ, Fresh light from the Biblical Texts. When He researched and wrote his boo he was not aware of the Tru316 publications by Dr. Joy Fleming. After having discovered them he is incorporating the insight that in Genesis 3:16 God took action in two ways, multiplying two things not one as many Bible versions mistranslate the Hebrew words for their readers. Go deeper? Dr. Joy Fleming's book is Man and Woman in Biblical Unity, Theology from Genesis 2-3.Andrew Bartlett's book is available from Inter Varsity Press. The Tru316 Foundation (www.Tru316.com) is the home of The Eden Podcast with Bruce C. E. Fleming where we “true” the verse of Genesis 3:16. The Tru316 Message is that “God didn't curse Eve (or Adam) or limit woman in any way.” Once Genesis 3:16 is made clear the other passages on women and men become clear too. You are encouraged to access the episodes of Seasons 1-11 of The Eden Podcast for teaching on the seven key passages on women and men. Are you a reader? We invite you to get from Amazon the four books by Bruce C. E. Fleming in The Eden Book Series (Tru316.com/trubooks). Would you like to support the work of the Tru316 Foundation? You can become a Tru Partner here: www.Tru316.com/partner

00:00 Four-Minute Offense 7:00 I. O. S. 16:34 What Is That? 18:25 Quick D-Backs 28:44 Doug's Big One = Cardinals Issue "False and Defamatory" comments 1:03:50 Suns Show Real Urgency 1:20:40 Town Hall Tuesday 1:39:30 Angel Reese