NC Personal Injury Attorneys Setting the Standard

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Four attorneys at the Pinto Coates Kyre & Bowers firm have been certified by the North Carolina Dispute Resolution Commission to be mediators in civil lawsuits. A mediator, such as the certified mediators at our firm, serves as a facilitator, focusing parties' discussions as to how they might settle their dispute. A mediator does not force the parties to settle, but he or she helps steer negotiations between the parties in an effort to compromise their claims and defenses so as to lead to a settlement of the lawsuit and hence avoid the uncertainty of a trial. Most civil lawsuits filed in North Carolina Superior Courts are required to have a mediated settlement conference. If a mediation is not successful, the mediator will report an “impasse” to the Court and the case will proceed to trial. A mediation is a confidential process, and except for several rare and rule-allowed situations, a mediator will not discuss what occurred at mediation with a judge or jury.

Parties to a lawsuit are allowed to select the mediator for their case, and so if you are in need of a mediator, you should consider utilizing the services of our certified mediators, because with their extensive experience as civil litigation attorneys, they bring with them as mediators the insight to help all sides of a dispute seek an acceptable compromise resolution.

Attorneys Who Are Certified Mediators:

Legal Decisions of Interest

  • A recent opinion out of the Texas Supreme Court has recently been the subject of a lot of commentary around the insurance coverage and construction world. The case is Ewing Construction Co. v. Amerisure Insurance Co., and it came before the Texas Supreme Court on certification of questions from the Fifth Circuit (Ewing Constr. Co. […]In cases involving construction defect claims (and potentially other types of claims), the insurance policy that is implicated is a very important issue.  The issue of whose policy and/or which policy is “on the risk” for a particular claim is most often referred to as “trigger of coverage”.  Some states’ laws allow all policies in […]
  • In connection with a discovery dispute between the parties, the Court of Appeals held that a blanket general objection asserted by the defendants based on “the attorney/client privilege, the work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or doctrine” was inadequate to effect the intended purpose of the objection. The Court noted that even though […]In a lawsuit involving a mobile home park tenant assaulted by another tenant, the Court of Appeals stated that although North Carolina law has recognized a landowner’s duty to exercise reasonable care to protect tenants from foreseeable third-party criminal acts, such a duty did not include a duty to evict a tenant, and although other […]
  • In a medical malpractice lawsuit brought by the parents of a deceased child alleging that defendant doctors were negligent in failing to discover lacerations to the child’s liver at the hospital following a car accident, the Court of Appeals agreed that the parents’ expert witness’ testimony was not improperly speculative, even though the expert used […]The North Carolina Supreme Court “adopted” the reasoning of the dissenting Court of Appeals judge and hence held that the age of a lawful visitor injured on property naturally occurring (a creek), in and of itself, did not impose a higher standard of care on the property owner, because such a heightened level of care […]
  • In a product liability action involving a self-propelled wheelchair that caught fire, resulting in the house to catch on fire and burning Plaintiff’s decedent, the Court of Appeals held that the defense of “insulating negligence” (by which a defendant is insulated from liability by an independent act of another) does not apply where it is […]The Court of Appeals, asserting that it was following established law, declined to allow damages for the loss of a pet dog based upon a strong emotional bond the owners had with the dog, and instead damages were generally limited to the cost of “replacing” the dog, since the Court viewed the dog as merely […]
  • Although Plaintiff filed the Complaint without it being signed and ordinarily that would result in the action being deemed not to have been properly instituted, Plaintiff’s prompt remedial measures of filing an amended, signed Complaint corrected the deficiency, and the amended Complaint related back to the commencement of the action for purposes of timeliness. Estate […]

Read More  >>>>    

Office Location

Phone:
336.282.8848
Fax:
336.282.8409
3203 Brassfield Road Greensboro, NC 27410
NC Personal Injury Lawyers