All Case Watch entries

New York Court of Appeals / New York

Can Both Parties Waive Mediation Confidentiality?

The New York Court of Appeals upheld disclosure of mediation-related information where the husband expressly waived confidentiality, the wife was deemed to have waived it by seeking disclosure, and the mediation agreement permitted disclosure with both parties’ consent. The court rejected the mediator’s qualified-privilege argument on those facts but did not decide what broader mediation privilege may otherwise exist under New York law.

Decision June 26, 2008 Identifier No. 183 SSM 16

Case at a glance

Court or authority
New York Court of Appeals
Authority status
Court decision
Jurisdiction
New York
Subject
Mediation confidentiality; waiver; mediator disclosure; mediation agreements; qualified privilege.
Hauzinger v. Hauzinger — New York Court of Appeals

Procedural posture and result

Review of an order requiring a nonparty mediator to provide mediation-related disclosure in post-divorce litigation. The New York Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding that confidentiality had been waived under the circumstances presented and rejecting the mediator’s qualified-privilege argument, while expressly declining to decide what mediation confidentiality privilege might otherwise exist under New York law.

What happened and what the authority decided

In post-divorce litigation, the wife sought disclosure of information relating to the parties’ earlier mediation. The husband executed a signed waiver releasing the nonparty mediator from maintaining mediation confidentiality.

Because the wife herself sought disclosure of mediation-related matters, the New York Court of Appeals treated her as having waived confidentiality as well.

The parties’ mediation agreement further provided that, if both parties consented, the mediator could communicate with an attorney for either party and release documents to third parties.

The mediator argued that a qualified privilege under CPLR 3101(b) nevertheless protected the mediation information from disclosure. The Court of Appeals rejected that argument under the circumstances presented and affirmed the disclosure order.

Importantly, the court limited its ruling. It expressly stated that it was not deciding what, if any, mediation confidentiality privilege otherwise exists under CPLR 3101(b).

What this tells the mediator

A mediator should not assume that a personal commitment to confidentiality independently overrides a valid waiver authorized by the parties’ mediation agreement. Before disclosing anything, however, the mediator should confirm who possesses the relevant confidentiality rights, whether all required parties have validly waived them, and exactly what information the waiver authorizes.

Practical guidance

  • Use an agreement that clearly states who may waive confidentiality and how.
  • Confirm that every required participant has knowingly consented in writing.
  • Define the exact documents and subjects covered by any waiver.
  • Do not disclose beyond the scope of the consent or court order.
  • State unresolved privilege questions neutrally and recommend independent legal advice.

Mediator takeaway

Verify the authority, scope, and form of every claimed confidentiality waiver before disclosing anything.

Reviewed by Wayne Lazarus on September 23, 2026. Reviewed for legal accuracy by Wayne Lazarus, a member of the Georgia and Florida Bars with more than 50 years of experience.

EDUCATIONAL SUMMARY FOR GENERAL INFORMATION — NOT LEGAL ADVICE.