 |
THURSDAY, AUGUST 5, 2010 To date, most of the litigation regarding same-sex couples and marriage has focused on state constitutional claims. Currently, however, a number of lawsuits raise federal constitutional claims with respect to same-sex couple and marriage. Some of these cases, including the pending Perry v. Schwarzenegger case, argue that excluding same-sex couples from the right to marry, or stripping same-sex couples of the right to marry, violate various federal constitutional principles. Other cases argue that denying federal recognition of valid marriages between same-sex couples violates the federal constitution. In addition, in a number of states, same-sex couples obtained the right to marry through the legislative process. The panelists are all on the front lines of these developments. Ted Olson will speak about his pending Perry v. Schwarzenegger case. Mary Bonauto, an attorney who won several same-sex marriage cases in state courts, will speak about her pending federal challenge, Gill v. OPM. Beth Robinson, another veteran of state court same-sex marriage cases, will speak about the legislative victory in Vermont. Moderator: Speakers:
Deal Mediation: Maximize Your Chances for Success in Complex Negotiations This advanced program in the emerging specialty practice of deal mediation explores the many dimensions of facilitated deal making with the goal of providing participants with proven and innovative approaches to creative problem-solving and consensus building as a neutral in order to unlock the greatest latent asset of any transaction - a strong relationship. Through observation and guided discussion of a case study animated "live" by the program faculty, participants will examine key phases of the deal mediation process and survey associated interpersonal dynamics. Emphasis will focus upon training participants in the various "tools" that a neutral may use to help parties build higher relational value in their deals while overcoming the psychological barriers to definitive agreement. Topics to be covered in this program include (1) an overview of the deal mediation process, (2) the role of the neutral as conflict coach in helping parties obtain durable agreements and build long-term relationships, (3) the role of the neutral in managing perception, leverage, emotion, and trust in a deal-making context, (4) the role of the neutral in documenting the agreed upon transactions, and (5) important ethical considerations. Panelists: Neuroscience, Negotiation and Persuasion: Applications and Implications in Litigation and Dispute Resolution Neuroscience and neuropsychology have yielded many important insights about the functioning of the human brain, and in turn, the mind. These insights are of enormous importance to anyone involved in advocacy and persuasion, activities which form the core of litigation, negotiation, mediation and arbitration. However, until recently, there is precious little organized information about how neuroscience and neuropsychology impacts the practicing lawyer. In this presentation, a negotiation professor with significant trial experience will illuminate the intersection between the study of the brain and the practice of law. Panelist:
3:45pm – 5:15pm Mediating the Intellectual Property Case: Can We Do a Better Job? One of the promises of mediation is that it helps parties meet their real- world needs and interests in a way that litigation is unable to do. And yet most mediation in intellectual property cases is dominated by litigation risk analysis, valuation and positional bargaining. It can be an efficient, cost-effective way to avoid trial. But could it be more? This panel of highly experienced mediators and IP litigators will address the benefits (and pitfalls) of expanding the IP mediation's problem definition from legal problem to business problem; of expanding the mediation process from risk analysis to creative problem solving. Moderator: Panelists: Arbitrating Complex Cases in the Healthcare Field: Education Over Advocacy Arbitration is the favored method of resolving complex healthcare business disputes. In fact, these disputes can become so complex, and the concepts so unfamiliar, that the primary goal of counsel is often to educate, not to advocate. Put differently, a focus on advocacy without education may leave the arbitrator or panel wondering just what the dispute is really about, and how to approach resolution. This presentation will focus on some tried and true techniques for organizing complex health care case presentations so that counsel can both educate and advocate, and get the best result possible. Panelists:
Registration Section Dinner - Friday, August 6
|
 |
