Mediator Resume

Michelson, Kane, P.C., [f.k.a. Michelson, Kane, Royster & Barger, P.C.] - Partner Central Connecticut State University - Adjunct Professor

Attorney - Civil Litigation, Construction, Corporate

Michelson, Kane, P.C., (f.k.a. Michelson, Kane, Royster & Barger, P.C.), 1982 - Present; Adjunct Professor, Central Connecticut State University, Graduate Program for Construction Management, 2004 - Present; Adjunct Professor, University of Connecticut School of Law, 1988 - 2001.

Since 1982, legal practice has been devoted to litigating and arbitrating construction and surety disputes involving major public and private projects. Have participated as a practitioner in scores of construction and commercial arbitrations and mediations ranging in value from tens of thousands to millions of dollars representing contractors/subcontractors, private and public owners, and sureties in a wide range of commercial, building, highway, and industrial projects. As a neutral, I have mediated or arbitrated approximately 100 commercial and construction cases over the last 30 years which have involved anywhere from two to a dozen parties and all manner and size of disputes and claims. These matters have involved all manner of disputes and breach of contract claims, including payment issues, delays and late completion, defective design and deficient performance or workmanship, property damages, and even personal injuries. Associate Professor, Central Connecticut State University, Undergraduate and Graduate Program for Construction Management, teaching "Construction Law," "Construction Finance Management" and "Contract Documents" from 2004 to the Present; between 1988-2001 taught "Law of Public Construction Contracts" at the University of Connecticut School of Law.

Member, AAA Master Mediator Panel (Construction--Northeast Region) Acted as a mediator in about 50 construction cases, plus approximately 10 commercial cases. Various cases have involved private owners and design professionals; public owners, contractors, sureties, insurance carriers, and design professionals; construction sureties and their contractor principals; and private owners, contractors, sureties and/or subcontractors. These cases typically involve claims of design deficiencies, delays, and contract performance issues.

Construction cases handled as a mediator have involved the following issues: adequacy of plans and specifications; owner's claims of improper workmanship by contractors or subcontractors; delays and extra work claims by contractors; indemnification issues between sureties and their (contractor) principals, which also included as subsets various types of contractor claims (delays, extra work) against the owner; payment disputes as between subcontractors and general contractor which also included various subsets of typical claims of defective work, delays, and extra work.

The sole objective of the mediator is to settle the case. Without any power or authority other than persuasion, logic and experience, the mediator has to identify the parties' true objectives - which oftentimes differ from their stated objectives at the beginning of the process - and bring these to the forefront of the discussions. Sometimes this is relatively simple; usually it is the key to achieving a settlement. The mediator must focus the parties on their fundamental requirements for settling a case and avoid getting hung up on less critical issues. Although in commercial cases, this usually comes down to money, it is not always limited to dollars. There may be performance questions, or other non-monetary considerations that are equally, or even more important than the monetary claims. The earlier in the process these "key" issues are identified, the more likely the chances of success. The parties must come into the process with a true willingness to resolve the case if they want mediation to succeed. The parties must be willing to at least listen to, if not fully accept, the other party's/parties' positions. The mediator must immediately gain the parties' trust if the process is going to work, and he must keep their trust throughout. The mediator must respect each party's views and positions, even if he believes they are weak or even illogical, and must not denigrate a party's position in the presence of the other party. (Private sessions oftentimes require a much different approach.) Sometimes the mediator has to separate the party's position from their lawyers' arguments, which can be difficult. Oftentimes, the mediator has to inform the parties, in private discussion, of his own evaluation of their position as a method of moving them toward settlement. This is probably the most difficult and sensitive part of the process, and it taxes the mediator's judgment, intuition, sense of timing, and powers of persuasion. Above all, the mediator must be tenacious to the concept of settling the case. All cases should settle; it is the mediator's job to convince the parties to accept this concept.

Successfully completed Clearbrief AI Academy, May 2025.

University of Connecticut (JD-1982); University of Massachusetts (MA-1978); Columbia University (BA-1974).

Admitted to the Bar: Connecticut (1982); U.S. District Court: District of Connecticut (1983); U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Connecticut Bar Association (Executive Committee, Chairman & Founding Member, Construction Law Section); Hartford County Bar Association (Board of Directors); American Bar Association (Forum Committee on the Construction Industry; Fidelity and Surety Law Committee; Tort and Insurance Practice Section): Member, AAA Master Mediator Panel (Construction--Northeast Region).

PUBLICATIONS: “Multi-Party Mediation: The More Parties the Merrier?," AAA on-line “Mediation Magazine,” October 16, 2025; “Shouldering the Risk: The Growing Problem of Subcontractors Building the Projects While Taking on Most of the Risk,” CONNStruction Winter 2023; “What Decisionmakers Should Know About Arbitrating Construction Disputes,” Aug. 1, 2023, Michelson, Kane, P.C., Blog (www.mkrb.com); “Connecticut’s Set Aside Program: What Can—and Cannot—Be Dictated by Construction Managers On Municipal Projects,” Jan. 8, 2023 Michelson, Kane, P.C., Blog (www.mkrb.com); “’Slaughter Clauses’” Ruled Illegal for Listed Subcontracts on State of Connecticut Construction Projects,” June 24, 2021, Michelson, Kane, P.C., Blog (www.mkrb.com); "New Contracting Requirements Will Pose Challenges," 39 Conn.L.Trib. No. 28, 7/15/13; "FUNDAMENTALS OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS & CLAIMS (CT)," Lorman 2012; "Offers of Compromise Could Facilitate Settlements," 37Conn. L. Trib. No. 45,11/7/11; "Proposed Contractor Evaluation System Has Pitfalls," 36 Conn. L. Trib. No. 28, 7/12/10; "A Positive Change Regarding Change Directives," 35 Conn. L. Trib. No. 44, 11/2/09; NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS IN CONNECTICUT, Lorman 2007; CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS IN CONNECTICUT: CLAIMS & INSURANCE ISSUES, Lorman, 2005; DAMAGE FOR DELAY AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS IN CONNECTICUT, Lorman, 2004 & 2005; PUBLIC CONTRACTING IN CT, Lorman, 1997-07; LABOR & REGULATORY ISSUES IN CT CONSTRUCTION, Lorman 2004; PAYMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS IN CT: MECHANIC'S LIENS & BONDS, Lorman, 1996-04; "Union Project Labor Agreements: Are they 'Favoritism'?," Connecticut Bar Association Annual Meeting, Construction Law Section, June 3, 1996; "Bid Disputes," CBA DEVELOPMENTS IN CONSTRUCTION LAW, May 2, 1996; Co-editor, CONNECTICUT BAR ASSOCIATION CONSTRUCTION CASE LAW SUMMARY AND LEGISLATIVE REVIEW, 1995-07; "Getting Paid: Payment Bond Claims," CONSTRUCTION MAGAZINE, Fall 1992; "Performance Bond Claims: The Surety's Defenses - An Update," American Bar Association, TIPS Mid-Winter Conference, 1991; "Construction Problems in CT," PESI, 1991; "Construction Claims in CT," Lorman, 1990; "CT Construction Claims and Collections," PESI, 1988; co-author, "CT Mechanic's Liens and Payment Bonds," PESI, 1987; Editor-in-Chief, CONNECTICUT LAW REVIEW, 1981-82. SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS: AAA Roundtable Leader, "Serving as an R7 Arbitrator," March 10, 2026; Speaker, CT Bar Association, Construction Law Section, Update on AAA Construction Rules Revisions, October 9, 2024; Speaker, CT Bar Assoc., Construction Law Section, "No More 'Slaughter Clauses'--Subcontract Provisions Under Conn. Gen. Stat. section 4b-96," Nov. 10, 2021; Speaker, CT Construction Managers Association, "Design Build Contracts-- the Relationship Between the CM/Contractor and the Designer," Oct. 19, 2021; Co-Presenter: “Avoiding The Worst Subcontract ‘Slaughter Clauses’,” Connecticut Subcontractors Association, Dec. 14, 2020; Recovering Extra Job Costs Resulting From The Covid-19 Pandemic,” Connecticut Subcontractors Association, Sept. 0, 2020; “Panelist: "A Practical Guide to Arbitration in Connecticut," CT Bar Association, Feb. 26, 2019; Co-Presenter, "Connecticut's New Uniform Arbitration Act," Construction Law & ADR Sections, Connecticut Bar Association, Sept. 26, 2018; "The Language of Mediating Construction and Commercial Disputes," ABA Section of Dispute Resolution Spring Conference, April 2010. Adjunct Professor, "Construction Law" & "Construction Finance Management" (graduate courses), Central Connecticut State University, Construction Management Program, 2004-present. Adjunct Professor, "Law of Public Contracts," University of Connecticut School of Law, 199

Within 25 miles of Hartford, CT area

Hourly Rate: Not provided Daily Rate: $3,800.00 Study Rate: $475.00/hr Cancellation: $750.00/Day Cancellation Period: 2 Days Comment: Study time at hourly rate. Travel time at listed rate. Cancellation fee of $750 charged per day if notice is less than 48 hours before the mediation.

English

United States of America

Hartford, Connecticut