Society of Lloyd’s v. Moore

The Society of Lloyd’s (Society) (plaintiff) had a collectible judgment from the 1990s against Lea Ward. In the 2000s, Society learned that Ward had transferred assets to two trusts. Society sued Ward, Alfred and Betty Moore, and other parties (collectively, the beneficiaries) (defendants), alleging fraud and fraudulent transfer. In 2006, the court granted summary judgment to the beneficiaries on the fraud claim but denied summary judgment on the fraudulent-transfer claim. Thereafter, the parties agreed to resolve the remaining claim through an alternative hybrid procedure consisting of arbitration and mediation. A single person, Lawrence Glassmann, would serve as both arbitrator and mediator. The arbitration occurred first, and Glassmann rendered a confidential decision. The decision was not revealed while mediation occurred. During the mediation, on February 20, 2006, Glassmann emailed Society with his assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of Society’s case. Glassmann’s assessment included a discussion of laches and a separate claim between the parties, and he urged Society to reach a settlement. The mediation was unsuccessful, and the arbitration decision was revealed. Glassman had ruled in favor of the beneficiaries. Later, Society filed a motion to vacate the arbitration award. Society argued that Glassman’s February 20 email showed that Glassman had relied on matters outside of the arbitration record to render his decision. The beneficiaries moved to strike the email from the record and from consideration, arguing that the email was a confidential and privileged mediation communication. Society responded that the email was not privileged for various reasons, including that the email discussed issues that had not been submitted for mediation and that there was no mediation privilege in a hybrid arbitration-mediation.