For Immediate Release

 (Baltimore, MD—July 10, 2002) The Maryland Judiciary’s Mediation and Conflict Resolution Office (MACRO) has just released the results of a year-long study of  400 workers’ compensation appeals filed in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City.  The study shows that the cases referred to mediation spent less time in the judicial system overall, and that fewer notices of discovery (court filings indicating activity taken by lawyers) were filed in the mediated cases.  This means that, on average, the mediated cases spent less time on court dockets and involved fewer hours of lawyers’ time, which would translate into lower legal fees.

“I knew that people who participated in mediation reported high levels of satisfaction with the process, but I wanted to see whether we could find any scientific evidence that using mediation  would result in significant cost benefits for the court and for litigants,” said the Honorable Ellen M. Heller, Administrative Judge of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, who initiated the study.  “Now we have that evidence,” Judge Heller continued, “and it supports our plans to expand the use of mediation in the court.”

"This study confirms what we have long suspected, that courts realize cost savings by using mediation,” stated the Honorable Robert M. Bell, Chief Judge, Maryland Court of Appeals, creator and chair of MACRO.  “While cost and time savings are very important,” Judge Bell pointed out, “it is also important to note that the judiciary supports the use of mediation because of  the less tangible benefits that arise in appropriate cases when people are empowered to resolve their own disputes productively and creatively. Mediation is one of the tools that can help transform our society from a culture of conflict to a culture of conflict resolution.”

The MACRO-sponsored research project was conducted by the Maryland Institute for Policy Analysis and Research at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, under the guidance of Professor Marvin Mandell.  The study revealed statistically significant differences between the mediation group of cases and the control group as follows:

• Approximately 24 percent of the cases in the mediation group were disposed of prior to the discovery deadline (after approx. 4 months), compared with only 11 percent in the control group.
• About 42 percent of cases in the mediation group were disposed of prior to their scheduled settlement conference (after approx. 6 months, which is 30 days pre-trial), compared to only 28 percent in the control group.
• Of the 197 cases scheduled for trial prior to July 1, 2001, 82% in the mediation group were resolved prior to trial (after approx. 7 months), compared with 70% in the control group.
• Only 37 percent of cases in the mediation group had two or more notices of discovery (a court filing that indicates activity taken by lawyers), compared with 56 percent in the control group.