Many attorneys have experienced the same moment in mediation. The mediator walks in and says, “The other side will not go any further.” You pause, wondering whether that statement is accurate or simply part of the negotiation dance. Even when you work with excellent mediators, there is often a lingering question: What information is real, and what is posturing?

In any settlement negotiation, accurate information is critical. You want to guide your client with confidence, but you also know that lawyers are permitted to engage in limited puffery. The ethical rules do not require opposing counsel to be truthful about their bottom dollar or top dollar. This creates space for strategic ambiguity, but it also creates uncertainty about what a mediator is actually relaying.

Before I became a mediator, I carried this skepticism myself. Because the mediators I worked with were often former attorneys, I wondered whether they might also shade the truth in the same way lawyers are ethically allowed to when negotiating. But the process works best if the mediator is honest with all parties.

That is why the American Bar Association’s new ethics opinion is so significant.

Opinion 518: A Clear Standard for Mediator Honesty

ABA Formal Opinion 518 leaves no room for ambiguity. Mediators are prohibited from making misrepresentations during negotiations. They cannot misstate intentions, positions, or what the other side has communicated as a final offer. If a party tells the mediator, “This is as far as we will go,” the mediator cannot represent the number as something different.

This standard is simple: mediators must maintain neutrality, and the parties must be able to trust that what they hear from the mediator is an accurate reflection of what the other party has stated.

Negotiation room dynamics do not change. Lawyers can still posture. Parties can still negotiate strategically. Counsel can misrepresent their own positions to the mediator. But the mediator cannot alter or embellish the information they receive. This preserves the mediator’s role as a reliable channel of communication, even in the middle of adversarial positioning. 

Why This Matters in Real Negotiations

When you know the mediator is not allowed to lie, the entire process becomes more grounded and predictable. Three practical benefits follow:

• You can trust that the mediator will not misrepresent information for either side.
• You can negotiate without questioning the accuracy of the information flow while maintaining reasonable skepticism about the other party’s statements.
• You can focus on strategy instead of second-guessing the mediator’s statements.

This clarity also affects what you choose to share. If your final offer is truly your final number, you need to understand that the mediator will not misstate it for you. If you are not ready for the other side to hear a number, keep it to yourself until you are fully prepared. Mediator honesty gives every participant a clearer sense of what to disclose and when.

A process built on accuracy increases confidence. It reduces unnecessary suspicion. And it gives mediators a stronger foundation for guiding parties toward resolution.

How This Shapes Your Next Mediation

The implications of Opinion 518 are simple but powerful. You still must evaluate the truthfulness of the opposing party. But you no longer have to evaluate the mediator’s honesty. The mediator becomes the one person in the room who is required to deliver information accurately every time.

The result is a more efficient negotiation process, fewer distractions, and a clearer understanding of what is actually being communicated across the table.

If you want a mediation process grounded in accuracy and trust, contact Sage Mediation Solutions to discuss your next case. We service Kansas City and the surrounding areas in Kansas and Missouri.