Meet D1’s Neutrals Series: JOHN E. BULMAN

Company: Pierce Atwood LLP
Location: Providence, Rhodes Island
Email: jbulman@pierceatwood.com
Webpage:  https://www.pierceatwood.com

Law School: Georgetown University Law Center, J.D., cum laude;Editor, Law and Policy in International Business (1984)
Types of ADR services offered: Mediation, Arbitration, Dispute Review Boards, Online Dispute Resolution (ODR)
Areas served: Nationwide

Affiliated ADR Organizations:

        American Arbitration Association (AAA)

International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution (CPR)

International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR)

College of Commercial Arbitrators (CCA)

Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CiArb)

Rhode Island Superior Court

Rhode Island Federal District Court

International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)

---

Q: Describe the path you took to becoming an ADR neutral.

A: Early in my career, I was an advocate in several AAA construction-related arbitrations.  The AAA saw fit to add me to its Panel of arbitrators around 1990.  Since then, I have served as an arbitrator or mediator in approximately twenty states.

Q: What percentage of your current legal practice is spent on ADR work?

A: 90% or more of my time is spent as a neutral.

Q: Describe your background and experience mediating and arbitrating construction cases.

A: I have served as a mediator in over 100 construction cases since 1990. I have served as an arbitrator and rendered awards in at least fifty arbitrations, ranging from $500,000 to $220,000,000 in controversy.   Most of the larger cases have been three-arbitrator panels; I have served as chair in the majority of those cases.

Q: Mediators are oftentimes described as “facilitative,” “evaluative,” or “transformative.” Do you have a style?

A: Each case calls for a specific emphasis and/or technique but I certainly lean toward facilitative negotiation.

Q: Do you have any practices that you find make you particularly effective as a mediator?

A: Asking open-ended questions to prompt each party to fully articulate not only the merits of the case but also how counsel expects to meet the other side’s defenses or counterclaim.

Q: Do you recommend individual preparatory meetings with the parties and counsel prior to the joint session?

A: Yes. Gaining a better understanding of the dispute background and prior settlement discussions saves time and energy at the mediation session itself.  It also preempts “going down the wrong road” at the mediation.

Q: What should attorneys and their clients take into consideration when vetting and/or selecting an arbitrator?

A: The arbitrator’s subject matter expertise and ability to manage the process efficiently.

Q: What advice do you have for parties when considering whether to choose a single arbitrator or a panel?

A: Cases with a large amount in controversy or where the technical expertise of a particular arbitrator is important are cases where a three-member panel is effective and appropriate.  Cases with several parties are also situations where a three-member panel is appropriate.

Q: Do you think limits should be placed on discovery in the arbitration context?

A: There should be limits since arbitration is not supposed to be a mirror image of litigation.

Q: What role should traditional rules of evidence play in the arbitration hearing?

A: By the time hearings take place, there should be a limited number of exhibits that are in controversy.  This is the only time when the “rules of evidence” have a bearing, and they have a limited bearing.

Q: What are some of your interests or hobbies outside of your ADR Neutral practice?

A: Furniture making and fly-fishing.

Editor Marissa L. Downs is a construction attorney in Chicago, Illinois where she has been practicing law for over a decade. Marissa is a partner at Laurie & Brennan, LLP and represents owners, general contractors, and subcontractors in all phases of project procurement, claim administration, litigation, and arbitration/trial. Marissa can be contacted at mdowns@lauriebrennan.com.