All Case Watch entries

Florida Supreme Court Mediator Ethics Advisory Committee (MEAC) / Florida

May a Mediator Decide Whether an Agreement Is Full or Partial?

Florida’s Mediator Ethics Advisory Committee concluded that a mediator may facilitate discussion about whether a settlement resolves all or only some issues, but may not make that substantive determination for the parties. A mediator may report a settlement as full or partial when the parties have made that determination and authorized the description, but should not infer settlement scope from the mediator’s own observations.

Decision July 7, 2020 Identifier MEAC Opinion 2020-002

Case at a glance

Court or authority
Mediator Ethics Advisory Committee, Florida Supreme Court
Authority status
Ethics or advisory opinion
Jurisdiction
Florida
Subject
Settlement scope; full and partial agreements; party self-determination; mediator reporting; mediation confidentiality.
MEAC Opinion 2020-002 — Florida Courts

Procedural posture and result

Advisory-opinion request concerning whether a mediator may determine that a settlement is full or partial when the parties themselves have not made that determination, and under what circumstances the mediator may characterize the settlement that way in a report to the court.

What happened and what the authority decided

A Florida-certified mediator sought clarification of earlier MEAC opinions concerning reports of “agreement,” “no agreement,” and “partial agreement.” The mediator questioned whether a neutral could characterize an agreement as full or partial based on the mediator’s understanding of the parties’ confidential discussions when the parties themselves had not made that determination.

The Mediator Ethics Advisory Committee concluded that the mediator may ask the parties whether they consider their agreement full or partial, or alternatively whether it resolves all issues in the case. If the parties agree on the scope, the mediator may ask whether they want that determination included in their written agreement.

If the signed agreement states that it is full or partial, or the parties request that the mediator report it that way, the mediator may include that characterization in the court report.

The mediator may not, however, unilaterally determine that an agreement is full or partial based on personal observations of the mediation. MEAC explained that doing so could amount to making a substantive decision for the parties, compromise self-determination and impartiality, and potentially disclose confidential mediation information.

The opinion therefore directs mediators to facilitate discussion about settlement scope and allow the parties—not the mediator—to determine whether all issues have been resolved.

What this tells the mediator

The mediator may help the parties identify what remains unresolved, but should not decide the legal or substantive scope of their settlement. Whether an agreement resolves all issues or only some issues is a determination for the parties, or ultimately the court where the parties do not agree.

Practical guidance

  • Ask the parties whether all pleaded and intended issues have been resolved.
  • Invite the parties to state the agreed status in their signed document.
  • Use only report descriptors authorized by rule and party consent.
  • Do not infer resolution of an issue merely because it was not discussed.
  • Keep the mediator’s interpretation out of the court report.

Mediator takeaway

The parties—not the mediator—decide the scope of their settlement.

Reviewed by Wayne Lazarus on September 14, 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.