New York Codes, Rules and Regulations
Title 22 - JUDICIARY
Subtitle A - JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION
Chapter I - Standards and Administrative Policies
Subchapter C - Rules Of The Chief Administrator Of The Courts
Part 160 - Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Trail Courts
Section 160.2 - Court Referral of Civil Disputes to ADR

(1) As provided in this Part, a state-funded court of the UCS shall refer each civil dispute pending before it to an appropriate ADR process at the earliest practicable time unless: (i) such referral is prohibited under statute, local rule of court, or administrative order of the Chief Administrator of the Courts or the Chief Administrator's designee, (ii) the court determines that the parties cannot participate effectively in an ADR process or that, for any other reason, referral to such a process will not serve the interests of justice, (iii) a party to the dispute objects to and opts out from such referral in accordance with local rule of court or administrative order of the Chief Administrator or designee (iv) the court determines, in consultation with the local Administrative Judge, that insufficient ADR resources, including but not limited to, mediators and neutral evaluators, are currently available, or (v) there are allegations of domestic violence as defined by the New York State Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence or of child abuse or neglect.

(2) At the earliest practicable time, a court shall inform the parties to such dispute regarding the available ADR processes. To the extent possible, the court shall provide the parties, or their counsel, with access to written or electronic materials describing: (i) how ADR is used to resolve a dispute (including how it may provide opportunities for exchanges of information to facilitate accelerated resolution of disputes), (ii) the associated costs of ADR, if any, and (iii) how a party can opt out of a referral to ADR pursuant to paragraph (1) of this subdivision.

(3) Where a court refers a dispute to an ADR process under this Part, the court shall refer such dispute to mediation unless there are compelling reasons to select another ADR process. In determining whether such compelling reasons exist, the court shall consider all relevant factors, including but not limited to: (i) any preference for a particular ADR process expressed by the parties to the dispute, (ii) the specific issues raised by the dispute, (iii) whether a party or parties to the dispute are unrepresented; and (iv) the availability of ADR processes other than mediation.

(4) Where the parties in a family court or matrimonial matter are referred to mediation under this Part, the parties shall be screened using a standardized mediation screening tool developed by the Statewide ADR Office of the UCS, to determine whether it is appropriate for mediation to proceed. This screening is in addition to any statutory registry checks under section 240 (1)(a) of the Domestic Relations Law and section 651 (e) of the Family Court Act. Where mediation is determined to be inappropriate, the matter shall be returned to the referring court.

(5) Referrals in accordance with this section may be to a neutral third party chosen by the parties to the dispute or, as appropriate, to a roster mediator, to a roster neutral evaluator, to mediation-trained court staff, or to a community dispute resolution center. Where the parties agree upon the choice of a neutral third party, they shall provide notice thereof to the court's ADR administrative personnel, as prescribed by the court.

(6) Notwithstanding the foregoing, a court may at any time remove a dispute from an ADR process to which it already has been referred where: (i) the court determines that such referral does not serve the interests of justice; or (ii) a party to the dispute objects to and opts out from such referral in accordance with local rule of court or administrative order of the Chief Administrator of the Courts or the Chief Administrator's designee.

(1) Where a referral in accordance with this section is to a mediator or neutral evaluator, other than one chosen by the parties to the dispute, such mediator or neutral evaluator must qualify under Part 146 of the Rule of the Chief Administrator of the Courts (22 NYCRR Part 146) or, in the case of a mediator, be eligible to serve as a mediator pursuant to rules of the Chief Administrator applicable to community dispute resolution centers, and meet such additional criteria as the court may prescribe.

(2) Courts may establish protocols for (i) the selection of neutral third parties, (ii) the referral of disputes to them, (iii) their compensation, (iv) the manner in which complaints of the parties about their conduct may be addressed, consistent with such statewide complaint process as shall have been approved by the Chief Administrator and such disciplinary process as may be applicable to nonjudicial employees of the UCS, and (v) the options available where one or more of the parties are unable to pay the costs of ADR. Nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit the Chief Administrator from prescribing, by administrative order, rules of general applicability regulating the compensation of neutral third parties in appropriate case types.