INTRODUCTION

After more than 20 years as a senior corporate attorney and senior executive, I am now devoting my time exclusively to providing mediation and arbitration services. During my corporate tenure I learned first-hand that many disputes would have been better resolved through some form of alternative dispute resolution process rather than litigation. It is the combination of a career of legal counseling of senior management, an insider knowledge of how the corporate structure works, doesn’t work, and can be made to work, and my management knowledge and skills that provides the foundation of my mediation and arbitration practice.

Dispute Resolution Alternatives  |  Background & Experience  |  Subject Matter Expertise
Mediation Style  |  Recognitions

Dispute Resolution Alternatives
Litigation is the means by which we have traditionally resolved private disputes. However, each of us knows, either as a participant or as an observer, that the litigation process is often slow, expensive and divisive. It is particularly ill-suited to positive, continuing relationships. As a result, efforts at alternative dispute resolution process strategies have become popular.

Arbitration can overcome many, but not all, of the short-comings of litigation. It has the advantage of generally being speedier than litigation. Procedures can be tailored to meet the needs of the parties and the circumstances. The proceedings can be less expensive. And it does have the advantage of closure: The arbitral panel renders a decision, which may or may not be binding depending on the prior agreement of the parties. Arbitration clauses are now common in many forms of contract. Yet arbitration, while often more efficient and cost-effective than litigation, suffers from some of the same weaknesses as litigation. It can still be a laborious and time-consuming process.

Mediation is the process by which adversaries work together to resolve their own differences with the assistance of a trained mediator. Mediation shares most of the benefits of arbitration, but is even more flexible than arbitration. Its most important distinction is that it is a process which forces the parties to resolve their own disputes by focusing on their needs, or interests, rather than their demands and to reach their own agreements without the intervention of a court or arbitral panel. Under the guidance of a trained and skilled mediator this is a very powerful and effective method of resolving disputes. Therefore, it is not surprising that this alternative dispute resolution strategy is gaining favor as a speedier, more efficient, more cost-effective and more permanent means of resolving disputes.

back to top

Background & Experience
I spent over 20 years as a transactional lawyer with Lucent Technologies, and AT&T before that. During those years I gained a unique understanding of how things work in the corporate setting and why they don’t, how disputes come about and the problems and consequences of miscommunication, both within the company and with customers, partners and suppliers. I came to understand the organizational barriers to resolving disputes, getting adequate focus on festering problems and achieving the proper level of attention and decision-making. I also came to realize that the disagreements at hand often related less to the substantive matters before the parties than to other undisclosed issues, priorities and agenda. As head of Lucent’s International Law Group, I gained a keen appreciation and respect for the cultural conflicts that arise in the course of doing business, as well as the misunderstandings that can arise from a lack of such appreciation. The list is as large and complex as the individual personalities and corporate culture and sub-cultures that make it up.

It is this perspective that provides me with a distinct advantage in understanding the root causes of a dispute, which in turn provides me with the insight necessary to better direct the mediation process and achieve a durable solution. This is particularly important where a continuing relationship among the parties may be important. In the arbitral setting, it gives me the advantage of better understanding the probable origins of the dispute beyond just the substantive issues facing the panel.

back to top

Subject Matter Expertise
Substantively, most of my practice has been transactional in nature, primarily conceptualizing, negotiating, maintaining and dissolving or liquidating commercial relationships with customers, suppliers and partners. These relationships took the form of contracts, acquisitions, joint ventures and other types of partnership arrangement. However, as managing counsel of various divisions within the company, and as head of Lucent’s International Law Group, I also had responsibility for most of the types of issues facing any corporation—labor, employment and ERISA; litigation; tax matters; intellectual property; regulatory and standards issues; real estate development and leasing; securities matters; corporate governance. In short, pretty much the entire business and legal landscape.

Specifically, my most recent assignments with Lucent were: Chief counsel to its Wireless Division; chief counsel to its Saudi Arabia operations; chief counsel to the Global Manufacturing & Joint Venture Organization; and head of the International Law Group. At AT&T, responsibilities included providing legal counsel for the investment of pension and savings plan assets, corporate governance and SEC filing functions; general counsel to AT&T’s real estate subsidiary; and chief counsel to its fiber optic and copper cable manufacturing unit, among others. A more complete description of my experience is contained in my resume.

In most of these assignments, I was also a member of the senior management steering committee, as well as the business development and strategy teams. I also often served as a troubleshooter in ferreting out relationship problems with joint venture partners, suppliers and customers.

back to top

Mediation Style
My preferred mediation style is facilitative in the belief that the best and most durable resolutions are those achieved by the parties themselves. The parties generally know the business issues and priorities, personalities and obstacles to a successful resolution as well as their own needs better than any mediator or arbitrator. On the other hand, I am not averse to being proactive and offering a generous dose of gray-haired reality, particularly when the process may have stalled due to unrealistic expectations of attorney or client, a failure to focus on needs rather than demands, or when one or more parties need to be reminded of the potential consequences of their failure to reach an agreement.

back to top

Recognitions
I am honored to be one of a select group of individuals to be included among the Distinguished Panel of Neutrals of the CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution, including its specialized Technology Panel. CPR, formerly known as the Center for Public Resources, is a non-profit leadership alliance of 500 major corporations and law firms at the forefront of resolving business and public disputes through innovative alternative dispute resolution approaches. CPR fulfills its commitment to quality in ADR development by involving the best of the profession and academia in its agenda of problem-solving, research, education and ADR advocacy, and in the dispute resolution services it provides through its Distinguished CPR Panels of Neutrals.

I am also an arbitrator and mediator registered with the USCIB/ICC. The United States Council for International Business (USCIB) is the exclusive representative in the United States for the International Chamber of Commerce’s (ICC) multifaceted dispute resolution services. It serves as the point of contact for the ICC International Court of Arbitration.

My other affiliations, as well as my educational background, are included.

back to top