(left:  the talented Mr. Pasich)

A very very long time ago, I defended my first coverage deposition at a firm named Troop Meisinger. 

I'd just joined the Buchalter firm and was struggling to learn both the law of coverage and the folkways of the new practice, which were considerably more genteel than I'd previously experienced representing garment industry and entertainment clients.  Which is a low-key way of saying that I'd developed a fairly obstreperous defense style before joining the coverage bar.  

The morning of the first deposition day, the questioner was a young -- and extremely frustrated -- associate.  After lunch, the highly experienced policyholder litigator  Kirk Pasich appeared and more or less put me in my place.  

The years flew by and that old coverage gang of mine -- both prosecution and defense -- drifted to other law firms.  Still, most of them continue to handle coverage cases, including the prolific Mr. Pasich who subsequently founded the Los Angeles office of Dickstein Shapiro.

My husband (also counsel for policy holders) recently brought home Kirk's article, California's Mediation Confidentiality and Insurance Bad Faith, which I'm providing to you here.

Though I take issue with Mr. Pasich's conclusion (excerpted below) the article exhaustively and concisely summarizes every important mediation privilege case in California, a great boon for California practitioners in any field.  And for which I thank Kirk.  For this and for that early kick in the pants of which I was then in need. 

Here's his conclusion.

The California Evidence Code provisions regarding mediation clearly place restrictions on the ability to use mediation documents and communications outside the context of the mediation. Those restrictions must be considered. Parties should take practical approaches to ensure that if they need to use any mediation communications and documents, they can do so. Otherwise, parties should engage in a settlement approach that all participants agree or acknowledge is not a mediation or is not subject to Evidence Code section 1119 et seq. However, even in the absence of statutory exceptions or the required waivers, there is a possibility that an insured may be able to use mediation communications and records as evidence of a carrier’s bad faith.

My thoughts on the matter tomorrow.