Mediator Sued for Sexual Harassment After High-Profile Settlement Raises Ethical Questions

The University of Michigan recently agreed to pay a landmark $490 million settlement to resolve claims brought by victims of its former team doctor, Robert Anderson—joining the record-breaking $500 million settlement earlier reached with Michigan State University over Larry Nassar. Amid the public focus on institutional accountability and victim redress, a surprising development has emerged involving the mediator who helped broker the University of Michigan settlement.

Just days ago, that mediator was personally sued for allegations of sexual harassment committed during and after the mediation process. According to a lawsuit filed by a former law firm colleague, the mediator secretly took hundreds of photographs of her on his iPad, made inappropriate comments and advances, continued to harass her after she left the firm, and contributed to her subsequent employment termination at a new firm. While all these claims remain allegations at this stage, they highlight a crucial question: Does a mediator's personal conduct—especially involving ethical violations—undermine the integrity of a high-stakes settlement?

The Allegations: Secret Recordings, Harassment, and Retaliation

The plaintiff, a former associate at the mediator’s firm, alleges that during her time working with him, he used his iPad to surreptitiously capture hundreds of photographs of her without consent. The complaint further contends that he made inappropriate comments and verbal advances, creating a hostile and unprofessional work environment.

The lawsuit claims the harassment and stalking continued even after the associate departed the firm. Notably, it asserts that her subsequent employer terminated her—allegedly at the mediator’s behest—due to his ongoing influence. These serious allegations were reported by the public law library, which provides comprehensive coverage of litigation and settlement developments in the University of Michigan case and the broader Michigan sexual-abuse litigation context.

Implications for the Settlement’s Validity

While personal misconduct often stands separate from professional responsibilities, mediation ethics require neutrals to maintain impartiality, confidence, and integrity throughout—and even after—a settlement process. This raises multiple questions:

• Was the mediator’s impartiality compromised during the negotiations?

• Could an alleged ethical violation give any party grounds to challenge the settlement’s validity?

• Should mediators involved in high-profile cases be subject to ongoing ethical scrutiny to ensure public confidence?

Although the legal doctrine of confirmation or vacatur of arbitration awards does not directly apply to mediated settlements, significant mediator misconduct—including conflicts that taint process integrity—may provide justification for revisiting or invalidating agreements in extreme cases. At minimum, allegations of this nature erode public confidence in the ADR process and underscore the importance of robust ethical standards.

The Ethical Responsibilities of Mediators

Mediation as a dispute resolution method relies heavily on the mediator’s neutrality, confidentiality, and ethical conduct. Disciplinary rules—such as the Uniform Mediation Act and various state statutes—outline expectations, including:

• Maintaining strict impartiality

• Avoiding sexual or inappropriate conduct

• Preventing harassment or retaliation

• Ensuring that personal interests do not compromise process integrity or confidentiality

Although these rules typically govern conduct during mediation, serious allegations that surface afterward may indirectly challenge the validity or legitimacy of settlement agreements, especially in high-profile disputes.

Lessons for Parties, Counsel, and ADR Practitioners

This case highlights several critical considerations:

1. Due Diligence in Mediator Selection

Parties and counsel should consider conducting basic background checks or asking for references—particularly for high-stakes engagements. An outstanding reputation and professional background can serve as valuable reassurance.

2. Ethical Recourse Exists

If personal misconduct by a mediator surfaces, parties may have options to challenge a settlement or seek disciplinary action through mediation organizations or state ethics boards.

3. Confidentiality and Reporting

Most mediation agreements and ethical guidelines require mediators to maintain confidentiality. If allegations arise post-mediation, parties must navigate confidentiality provisions while seeking accountability—often involving third-party ethical oversight.

4. Transparency in High-Stakes Cases

High-profile settlements may benefit from a coordinated approach to mediator oversight, including documented disclosures, public accountability, and transparent ethical protocols.

Preserving ADR Integrity

The allegations against the mediator serve as a critical reminder: even proven process outcomes can be subject to ethical scrutiny if misconduct emerges in hindsight. Maintaining public trust in ADR depends on the combined strength of ethical rules, ongoing oversight, and professional accountability.

While allegations remain just that, they reinforce why professional care in mediator selection—and consistent enforcement of ethical standards—are essential in high-value settlements.

Nationwide ADR: Ethical, Experienced, and Trustworthy

At Nationwide ADR, adherence to strict ethical rules is non-negotiable. Whether handling mediations in the workplace, business disputes, complex tort claims, or high-stakes settlement negotiations, each decision and facilitation is guided by integrity, neutrality, and respect.

Nationwide ADR is committed to Unlocking Solutions for Demanding Cases—while preserving trust, dignity, and professionalism throughout the process.

For inquiries on mediator selection protocols, ethical practices, or ADR services aligned with the highest standards, visit NationwideADR.com.