As I just sent to our listserve as well, I am advising a committee for our state bar about the role of lawyer-mediators in drafting marital settlement agreements. The committee has already reached a consensus that it would like to permit mediators to draft mediation settlement agreements in family law cases. The key question for the committee is whether to permit this under a joint representation model (in which the lawyer is representing both parties under Rule 2.4 and other rules after the clients waive conflicts) or under a neutral representation model in which the mediator is not representing either party and parties are informed about that “limited” representation which would permit the mediator to draft.
We (read my RA’s) have already done a 50 state survey as to what is going on and there are examples of each in action (i.e. New York is a joint model and Maine is a neutral model and Connecticut seems to permit drafting without picking one of these). What I am looking for is any practice experience or opinions about those models in action. The committee would prefer to go with a neutral model and they want to make sure there are no hidden problems or concerns with that.
Any help, examples, thoughts or opinions are appreciated!