McLaughlin v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
189 Cal. Rptr. 479 (1983)
Thomas McLaughlin (plaintiff) and Linda McLaughlin sought a divorce and both moved for custody of their three children; under California law, custody disputes went through mediation first, and a local rule of the Superior Court (defendant) required mediators to make recommendations to the court if mediation failed, while barring both disclosure of the recommendation's bases and any cross-examination of the mediator to protect confidentiality. Different counties had adopted different rules on this issue. Before mediation began, Mr. McLaughlin sought a protective order barring any mediator recommendation unless cross-examination were allowed, which the trial court denied as inconsistent with the local rule; McLaughlin sought a writ of mandate, and the state supreme court asked the Court of Appeal to assess the local rule's constitutionality.
Whether a local court rule is constitutional where it requires mediators in child-custody disputes to make recommendations to the court but denies the parties an opportunity to cross-examine the mediator as to the bases for his or her recommendations.