(a) ADR Favored. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) refers to a set of procedures that seek to
provide litigants a more informal, less expensive, and less adversarial method for resolving their disputes
than is afforded by traditional litigation procedures. The judges of this district favor ADR methods in cases
where the court determines, after consultation with the parties, that ADR may help resolve the case. The
ADR methods approved by these rules include facilitative mediation (LR 16.4); case evaluation (LR 16.5);
settlement conferences (LR 16.6); and other procedures (LR 16.7). The court will also consider other ADR
methods that the parties propose.
(b) Court Administration of the ADR Program. ADR is authorized in
all civil actions in this district under 28 U.S.C. § 651(b). Each ADR program is governed by these rules.
(c) Consideration of ADR. In appropriate cases, as part of the conference held under Rule 26(f) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or at some other conference ordered by the court, all litigants and
counsel must consider and discuss the use of an appropriate ADR process at a suitable stage of the
litigation.
(d) Confidentiality. Communications in ADR proceedings are confidential. They are not subject to
discovery, are not admissible in a proceeding, and may not be disclosed to anyone other than the ADR
participants unless the court permits disclosure. No party may compel a mediator to produce documents
that relate to, or testify to matters discussed during, ADR proceedings except on order of the court.
(e) Judicial Officers. District judges, bankruptcy judges, and magistrate judges performing
alternative dispute resolution functions, such as serving as mediators or settlement conference judges,
act in their capacity as federal judicial officers.
(f) Neutrality of Evaluators, Mediators and Arbitrators.
(1) Standards for Disqualification. The standards for disqualification of a judicial officer
under 28 U.S.C. § 455 apply to an evaluator and mediator. If the parties agree to the rules of an arbitration
tribunal (such as the American Arbitration Association), the standards for disqualification of an arbitrator
in those rules apply. If the rules of an arbitration tribunal do not apply, the standards for disqualification
of a judicial officer under 28 U.S.C. § 455 apply to an arbitrator.
(2) Procedure for Disqualification. If an evaluator, mediator, or
arbitrator becomes aware of facts that may require disqualification, or a party raises an issue about
disqualification, the evaluator, mediator or arbitrator must disclose the relevant facts to the parties. If a
party requests that the person withdraw, the person may withdraw and notify the court that another
person should be appointed. If the person determines that withdrawal is not warranted, the person may
elect to continue. The objecting party may then ask the court to remove the person by filing a motion.
This procedure does not apply if the parties have agreed to another procedure.
United States District Court
Eastern District of Michigan
(g) Status of Discovery, Motions and Trial During the ADR Process.
Cases referred to ADR continue to be subject to the case management schedule established by the judge
assigned to the case. Unless otherwise ordered, parties are not precluded from filing pretrial motions or
pursuing discovery. Referral of a case to ADR is not grounds to avoid or postpone any deadline or
obligation imposed by the case management order unless ordered by the court.
(h) Attorney’s Responsibility for Payment of Fees.
The attorney or law firm representing a party participating in ADR is directly responsible for fees payable
to the court, mediators, or arbitrators. Parties not represented by an attorney are personally responsible
for fees. To the extent consistent with ethical rules, the attorney or law firm may seek reimbursement
from the client. If any attorney or unrepresented party is delinquent in paying any fee required to be paid
to a mediator or arbitrator under these rules, the mediator or arbitrator may petition the court for an
order directing payment, and any judge or magistrate judge assigned to the case may order payment,
upon pain of contempt.
COMMENT: Responsibility for payment of fees to mediators can be
adjusted by the Court, considering the fairness in allocating likely
expenses among the parties. In cases in which a party is represented by
a pro bono attorney under the Court’s pro bono counsel program,
volunteer mediators are available at no cost to the parties. See also LR
16.4(d).
January 1, 2026
United States District Court
Eastern District of Michigan
