Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mediation Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances Uniform Mediation Act after heated debate; amendment to add rescission window fails
Summary
Senators advanced SB61, adopting a version of the Uniform Mediation Act that broadens confidentiality and requires mediator disclosures. An amendment to allow a short rescission period for settlement agreements failed after debate about uniformity and finality.
Senators voted to move Senate Bill 61, the Uniform Mediation Act, toward final consideration after an extended floor debate over a proposed amendment that would have allowed parties a short rescission window to reconsider mediation settlement agreements. Sponsor Senator Hilliard said the bill modernizes Utah law to expand confidentiality protections in mediation, require clearer disclosure of mediator conflicts and better align Utah with a growing national uniform law.
The most intense floor exchange came when Senator Fife offered an amendment proposing a brief rescission period following mediation agreements, arguing that such a period would help ensure fairness where parties may make decisions under time pressure or unanticipated personal events. Fife said the amendment would provide a short “reconsideration” window to prevent outcomes that later appear unjust.
Senator Hilliard and other supporters opposed the amendment, saying it would undermine the bill’s purpose and destroy the uniformity that makes a national mediation standard attractive. Hilliard warned a rescission right could invite “buyer’s remorse” and hinder finality, particularly where attorneys have reviewed agreements or where courts must approve settlements. After debate, the Senate put the amendment to a roll call and it failed.
Following the failed amendment, proponents said the bill still contains several Utah-specific clarifications while preserving key uniform-law features: broader confidentiality for mediation communications, explicit duties for mediators to disclose conflicts of interest, and carve-outs requiring mediators to report criminal or elder-abuse allegations when state law makes reporting mandatory. Senator Hilliard said he would hold SB61 on third reading to accommodate technical drafting discussions with stakeholders, but the Senate agreed to read the bill for the third time.
The session recorded that SB61 would be read for the third time; no final enactment vote on passage was recorded before the lunch recess. Sponsors and opponents agreed to continue technical work on exceptions the bar and courts raised, including language addressing when confidentiality yields to mandatory reporting obligations.
