Collaborative Law Rules - proposed 10-2012

COLLABORATIVE LAW RULES

 

RULE 1. SHORT TITLE

 

These rules may be cited as the Collaborative Law Rules.

 

RULE 2. DEFINITIONS

 

In these rules:

   (a) “Collaborative law communication” means a statement, whether oral or in a record, or

verbal or nonverbal, that:

   (1) is made to conduct, participate in, continue, or reconvene a collaborative law process; and

   (2) occurs after the parties sign a collaborative law participation agreement and before the collaborative law process is concluded.

  

   (b) “Collaborative law participation agreement” means an agreement by persons to participate in a collaborative law process.

 

   (c) “Collaborative law process” means a procedure intended to resolve a collaborative matter without intervention by a tribunal in which persons:

   (1) sign a collaborative law participation agreement; and

   (2) are represented by collaborative lawyers.

 

   (d) “Collaborative lawyer” means a lawyer who represents a party in a collaborative law process.

 

   (e) “Collaborative matter” means a dispute, transaction, claim, problem, or issue for resolution, including a dispute, claim, or issue in a proceeding, which is described in a collaborative law participation agreement.

 

   (f) “Law firm” means:

   (1) lawyers who practice law together in a partnership, professional corporation, sole proprietorship, limited liability company, or association; and

   (2) lawyers employed in a legal services organization, or the legal department of a corporation or other organization, or the legal department of a government or governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality.

 

   (g) “Nonparty participant” means a person, other than a party and the party’s collaborative lawyer, who participates in a collaborative law process.

 

   (h) “Party” means a person who signs a collaborative law participation agreement and whose consent is necessary to resolve a collaborative matter.

 

   (i) “Person” means an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, public corporation, government or governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality, or any other legal or commercial entity.

 

   (j) “Proceeding” means:

   (1) a judicial, administrative, arbitral, or other adjudicative process before a tribunal, including related prehearing and post-hearing motions, conferences, and discovery; or

   (2) a legislative hearing or similar process.

 

   (k) “Prospective party” means a person who discusses with a prospective collaborative lawyer the possibility of signing a collaborative law participation agreement.

 

   (l) “Record” means information that is inscribed on a tangible medium or that is stored in an electronic or other medium and is retrievable in perceivable form.

 

   (m) “Related to a collaborative matter” means involving the same parties, transaction or occurrence, nucleus of operative fact, dispute, claim, or issue as the collaborative matter.

 

   (n) “Sign” means, with present intent to authenticate or adopt a record:

   (1) to execute or adopt a tangible symbol; or

   (2) to attach to or logically associate with the record an electronic symbol, sound, or process.

 

   (p) “Tribunal” means:

   (1) a court, arbitrator, administrative agency, or other body acting in an adjudicative capacity which, after presentation of evidence or legal argument, has jurisdiction to render a decision affecting a party’s interests in a matter; or

   (2) a legislative body conducting a hearing or similar process.

 

RULE 3. APPLICABILITY

 

   (a) These rules apply to a collaborative law participation agreement that meets the requirements of Rule 4 signed after on or after the effective date of these rules.

 

   (b) The use of collaborative law applies only to matters that would be resolved in civil court and may not be used to resolve matters in criminal cases.

 

RULE 4. (reserved)

 

 

RULE 5. (reserved)

 

 

RULE 6. PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE TRIBUNAL; STATUS REPORT

 

   (a) Persons in a proceeding pending before a tribunal may sign a collaborative law participation agreement to seek to resolve a collaborative matter related to the proceeding. The parties shall file promptly with the tribunal a notice of the agreement after it is signed. Subject to

subsection (c) and Rules 7 and 8, the filing operates as an application for a stay of the proceeding.

 

   (b) The parties shall file promptly with the tribunal notice in a record when a collaborative law process concludes. The stay of the proceeding under subsection (a) is lifted when the notice is filed. The notice may not specify any reason for termination of the process.

 

   (c) A tribunal in which a proceeding is stayed under subsection (a) may require the parties and collaborative lawyers to provide a status report on the collaborative law process and the proceeding. A status report may include only information on whether the process is ongoing or concluded. It may not include a report, assessment, evaluation, recommendation, finding, or other communication regarding a collaborative law process or collaborative law matter.

 

   (d) A tribunal may not consider a communication made in violation of subsection (c).

 

   (e) A tribunal shall provide parties notice and an opportunity to be heard before dismissing a proceeding in which a notice of collaborative process is filed based on delay or failure to prosecute.

RULE 7. EMERGENCY ORDER

 

During a collaborative law process, a tribunal may issue emergency orders to protect the health, safety, welfare, or interest of a party or a family or household member as defined in RCW 26.50.010.

 

RULE 8. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT BY TRIBUNAL

 

A tribunal may approve an agreement resulting from a collaborative law process.

 

 

RULE 9. DISQUALIFICATION OF COLLABORATIVE LAWYER AND

LAWYERS IN ASSOCIATED LAW FIRM

 

   (a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c), a collaborative lawyer is disqualified from appearing before a tribunal to represent a party in a proceeding related to the collaborative matter.

 

   (b) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c) and Rules 10 and 11, a lawyer in a law firm with which the collaborative lawyer is associated is disqualified from appearing before a tribunal to represent a party in a proceeding related to the collaborative matter if the collaborative lawyer is disqualified from doing so under subsection (a).

 

   (c) A collaborative lawyer or a lawyer in a law firm with which the collaborative lawyer is associated may represent a party:

   (1) to ask a tribunal to approve an agreement resulting from the collaborative law process; or

   (2) to seek or defend an emergency order to protect the health, safety, welfare, or interest of a party, or family or household member as defined in RCW 26.50.010, if a successor lawyer is not immediately available to represent that person.

 

   (d) If subsection (c)(2) applies, a collaborative lawyer, or lawyer in a law firm with which the collaborative lawyer is associated, may represent a party or family or household member only until the person is represented by a successor lawyer or reasonable measures are taken to protect the health, safety, welfare, or interest of the person.

 

RULE 10. (reserved)

 

  

 

RULE 11. GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY AS PARTY

 

   (a) The disqualification of Rule 9(a) applies to a collaborative lawyer representing a party that is a government or governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality.

 

   (b) After a collaborative law process concludes, another lawyer in a law firm with which the collaborative lawyer is associated may represent a government or governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality in the collaborative matter or a matter related to the collaborative matter if:

   (1) the collaborative law participation agreement so provides; and

   (2) the collaborative lawyer is isolated from any participation in the collaborative matter or a matter related to the collaborative matter through procedures within the law firm which are reasonably calculated to isolate the collaborative lawyer from such participation.

 

RULE 12. (reserved)

 

RULE 13. STANDARDS OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND

MANDATORY REPORTING NOT AFFECTED

 

   (a) These rules do not affect the professional responsibility obligations and standards applicable to a lawyer or other licensed professional or relieve a lawyer or other licensed professional from the duty to comply with all applicable professional responsibility obligations and standards.

 

   (b) These rules do not affect the obligation of a person to report abuse or neglect, abandonment, or exploitation of a child or adult under the law of this state.

 

   (c)  Noncompliance with an obligation or prohibition imposed by these rules does not in itself establish grounds for professional discipline.

 

RULE 14. APPROPRIATENESS OF COLLABORATIVE LAW PROCESS

 

Before a prospective party signs a collaborative law participation agreement, a prospective collaborative lawyer shall:

 

   (a) assess with the prospective party factors the lawyer reasonably believes relate to whether a collaborative law process is appropriate for the prospective party’s matter;

 

   (b) provide the prospective party with information that the lawyer reasonably believes is sufficient for the party to make an informed decision about the material benefits and risks of a collaborative law process as compared to the material benefits and risks of other reasonably available alternatives for resolving the proposed collaborative matter, such as litigation, mediation, arbitration, or expert evaluation; and

 

   (c) advise the prospective party that:

   (1) after signing an agreement if a party initiates a proceeding or seeks tribunal intervention in a pending proceeding related to the collaborative matter, the collaborative law process terminates;

   (2) participation in a collaborative law process is voluntary and any party has the right to terminate unilaterally a collaborative law process with or without cause; and

   (3) the collaborative lawyer and any lawyer in a law firm with which the collaborative lawyer is associated may not appear before a tribunal to represent a party in a proceeding related to the collaborative matter, except as authorized by Rule 9(c), 10(b), or 11(b).

 

RULE 15. COERCIVE OR VIOLENT RELATIONSHIP

 

   (a) Before a prospective party signs a collaborative law participation agreement, a prospective collaborative lawyer shall make reasonable inquiry whether the prospective party has a history of a coercive or violent relationship with another prospective party.

 

   (b) Throughout a collaborative law process, a collaborative lawyer reasonably and continuously shall assess whether the party the collaborative lawyer represents has a history of a

coercive or violent relationship with another party.

 

   (c) If a collaborative lawyer reasonably believes that the party the lawyer represents or the prospective party who consults the lawyer has a history of a coercive or violent relationship with another party or prospective party, the lawyer may not begin or continue a collaborative law process unless:

   (1) the party or the prospective party requests beginning or continuing a process; and

   (2) the collaborative lawyer reasonably believes that the safety of the party or prospective party can be protected adequately during a process.

 

RULE 16. CONFIDENTIALITY OF COLLABORATIVE LAW COMMUNICATION

 

Subject to Rule 13, a collaborative law communication is confidential to the extent agreed by the parties in a signed record or as provided by law of this state other than these rules.

 

RULE 17. PRIVILEGE AGAINST DISCLOSURE FOR COLLABORATIVE LAW COMMUNICATION; ADMISSIBILITY; DISCOVERY

 

   (a) Subject to Rules 18 and 19, a collaborative law communication is privileged under subsection (b), is not subject to discovery, and is not admissible in evidence.

 

   (b) In a proceeding, the following privileges apply:

   (1) A party may refuse to disclose, and may prevent any other person from disclosing, a collaborative law communication.

   (2) A nonparty participant may refuse to disclose, and may prevent any other person from disclosing, a collaborative law communication of the nonparty participant.

 

   (c) Evidence or information that is otherwise admissible or subject to discovery does not become inadmissible or protected from discovery solely because of its disclosure or use in a collaborative law process.

 

RULE 18. WAIVER AND PRECLUSION OF PRIVILEGE

 

   (a) A privilege under Rule 17 may be waived in a record or orally during a proceeding if it is expressly waived by all parties and, in the case of the privilege of a nonparty participant, it is also expressly waived by the nonparty participant.

 

   (b) A person that makes a disclosure or representation about a collaborative law communication which prejudices another person in a proceeding may not assert a privilege under

Rule 17, but this preclusion applies only to the extent necessary for the person prejudiced to respond to the disclosure or representation.

 

RULE 19. LIMITS OF PRIVILEGE

 

   (a) There is no privilege under Rule 17 for a collaborative law communication that is:

   (1) available to the public under chapter 42.56 RCW or made during a session of a collaborative law process that is open, or is required by law to be open, to the public;

   (2) a threat or statement of a plan to inflict bodily injury or commit a crime of violence;

   (3) intentionally used to plan a crime, commit or attempt to commit a crime, or conceal an ongoing crime or ongoing criminal activity; or

   (4) in an agreement resulting from the collaborative law process, evidenced by a record signed by all parties to the agreement.

 

   (b) The privileges under Rule 17 for a collaborative law communication do not apply to the extent that a communication is:

   (1) sought or offered to prove or disprove a claim or complaint of professional misconduct or malpractice arising from or related to a collaborative law process; or

   (2) sought or offered to prove or disprove abuse, neglect, abandonment, or exploitation of a child or adult, unless the child protective services agency or adult protective services agency is a party to or otherwise participates in the process; or

   (3) sought or offered to prove or disprove stalking or cyber stalking of a party or child.

 

   (c) There is no privilege under Rule 17 if a tribunal finds, after a hearing in camera, that the party seeking discovery or the proponent of the evidence has shown the evidence is not otherwise available, the need for the evidence substantially outweighs the interest in protecting confidentiality, and the collaborative law communication is sought or offered in:

   (1) a court proceeding involving a felony or misdemeanor; or

   (2) a proceeding seeking rescission or reformation of a contract arising out of the collaborative law process or in which a defense to avoid liability on the contract is asserted.

 

   (d) If a collaborative law communication is subject to an exception under subsection (b) or (c), only the part of the communication necessary for the application of the exception may be disclosed or admitted.

 

   (e) Disclosure or admission of evidence excepted from the privilege under subsection (b) or (c) does not make the evidence or any other collaborative law communication discoverable or admissible for any other purpose.

 

   (f) The privileges under Rule 17 do not apply if the parties agree in advance in a signed record, or if a record of a proceeding reflects agreement by the parties, that all or part of a collaborative law process is not privileged. This subsection does not apply to a collaborative law communication made by a person that did not receive actual notice of the agreement before the communication was made.

 

RULE 20. AUTHORITY OF TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF NONCOMPLIANCE

 

   (a) If an agreement fails to meet the requirements of the Uniform Collaborative Law Act, or a lawyer fails to comply with Rule 14 or 15, a tribunal may nonetheless find that the parties intended to enter into a collaborative law participation agreement if they:

   (1) signed a record indicating an intention to enter into a collaborative law participation agreement; and

   (2) reasonably believed they were participating in a collaborative law process.

 

   (b) If a tribunal makes the findings specified in subsection (a), and the interests of justice require, the tribunal may:

   (1) enforce an agreement evidenced by a record resulting from the process in which the parties participated;

   (2) apply the disqualification provisions of the Uniform Collaborative Law Act and of Rules 6, 9, 10, and 11; and

   (3) apply a privilege under the Collaborative Law Act or Rule 17.

Welcome

Welcome to our community of ADR professionals: mediators, arbitrators, and lawyers representing and advising clients.  We are active in the growth and development of ADR in Washington as well as the education of members of the bar and the public.

Latest Activity

An event by WSBA ADR was featured

Basic Mediation Training at Seattle University School of Law

December 7, 2019 from 8:30am to 5:30pm
Nov 18
WSBA ADR posted an event

Basic Mediation Training at Seattle University School of Law

December 7, 2019 from 8:30am to 5:30pm
Nov 18
Dee Knapp posted a status
"Participating in a dynamic retreat and discussion with my fellow members of the WSBA ADR Executive Committee this weekend!"
Nov 16
Adrienne Keith Wills updated their profile
Nov 1

© 2019   Created by WSBA ADR.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service