In a compelling episode of The Attorney Post, Nigel Wright, a distinguished mediator with over 30 years of legal experience, discussed the nuances of mediation, career transitions, and the evolving landscape of dispute resolution. Now a prominent figure at Henning Mediation and Arbitration Services and an adjunct professor at Emory Law School, Wright offered valuable perspectives on achieving fair settlements in an increasingly complex world.
Nigel Wright’s legal journey began in the United Kingdom, where he completed a three-year law program before qualifying as a solicitor. Since moving to Atlanta more than two decades ago, Wright has built a career that blends mediation, arbitration, and education. His experience spans commercial litigation, insurance disputes, and reinsurance cases, making him a sought-after neutral in high-stakes matters.
Today, Henning Mediation is considered the gold standard in Atlanta, and Wright’s presence there reflects a broader shift toward alternative dispute resolution (ADR) as a primary means of resolving legal conflicts.
Wright noted that he transitioned into full-time mediation just before the COVID-19 pandemic began—a particularly challenging time for the profession. Early in the pandemic, uncertainty led many plaintiffs to settle quickly. However, as people adapted, settlement behaviors shifted, and claim valuations significantly increased from 2019 onward.
The pandemic also accelerated the legal industry's adoption of technology. Wright observed that virtual mediation, conducted through platforms like Zoom, improved the efficiency of client interactions but introduced new challenges in reading non-verbal cues and building trust remotely.
A major focus of Wright’s discussion was the emotional undercurrent present in mediation, even in commercial cases involving executives. Misjudging the value of claims, often driven by emotional investment or poor risk assessment, can derail negotiations. Wright emphasized the importance of accurately assessing risk tolerance and managing client expectations early in the mediation process.
He candidly noted that in his experience, roughly 20% of claims expected to win ultimately fail—and vice versa—illustrating the inherent unpredictability of legal outcomes.
Wright emphasized that choosing the right mediator is crucial, especially for larger claims. Too often, parties neglect to research a mediator’s background, style, and potential biases. In commercial litigation, parties frequently vet mediators as rigorously as they would opposing counsel, understanding that neutrality and trust are essential.
Maintaining confidentiality is paramount. Wright stressed that mediators must carefully separate confidential information from disclosures authorized by the parties, noting that any perceived breach of neutrality can derail settlement efforts.
Handling complex mediations involving numerous parties presents unique challenges. Wright recalled instances of mediating cases with up to nine parties, each with divergent interests. Effective pre-mediation communication is critical to establish trust and ensure smoother negotiations.
He also emphasized that persuasive mediation briefs—those that clearly lay out confidential issues and public arguments—help mediators navigate complex cases. Leaving critical information out of the mediation brief, he warned, can seriously undermine the settlement process.
Drawing from his early negotiation experiences in India and Japan, Wright highlighted the importance of cultural sensitivity in international mediation. He cautioned, however, that sensitivity does not mean blind acceptance of inconsistent claims. Understanding local customs, like mourning periods in Japan, can be pivotal in structuring realistic timelines and expectations during negotiations.
Wright shared that some parties mistakenly perceive mediators based on accents, previous affiliations, or perceived loyalties. These misconceptions can create obstacles before mediation even begins. He reiterated that mediators are not advocates for one side but facilitators working toward voluntary resolutions based on informed decision-making.
In complex, high-value disputes, understanding financial drivers like insurance renewal cycles or cash flow imperatives is critical. Wright noted that while mediators can "settle anything for a million dollars," resolving disputes involving tens of millions requires far deeper strategy and effort.
Discussing recent tort reform measures in Georgia, Wright expressed concern that bifurcation rules could increase costs and complicate case resolution. He noted that evolving legislation will require even more agility from mediators and attorneys alike.
Wright closed by offering practical advice: parties should communicate with their mediators in advance of sessions to clarify expectations, styles, and strategies. Establishing rapport beforehand can dramatically improve the chances of a successful mediation.
Henning Mediation & Arbitration Service, Inc.
3350 Riverwood Parkway
Riverwood Building, Lobby, Suite 75
Atlanta, Georgia 30339
(770) 955-2252
Online at: Henning Mediation & Arbitration Service, Inc.
