STEFAN MASON ESQ.

Previous Experience: Private law practice in Los Angeles, Ca1if. as President. Stefan M. Mason. a Law Corp., 1979--; Partner, Munger, Tolles & Olson. 1970-79; Associate, Munger. Tolles, Hills & Rickershauser, 1969-70.

Participant/Memberships/Awards: Member, Los Angeles Police Commission's Board of Rights hearings as a Commission Hearing Examiner. 1994-97; certified mediator and panel arbitrator for American Arbitration Assn.; Society of Professionals in Disputes Resolution (member. Membership Committee, 1995). 1991-; Southern Calif. Mediation Assn., 1992; National and Calif. Employment Lawyers Assns., 1987; American Employment Law Council, 1993; American Bar Assn. (member, Individual Rights and Responsibilities Section, 1990--; Committee on Labor Arbitration and the Law of Collective Bargaining Agreements, Labor and Employment Law Section. 1976--); Los Angeles County Bar Assn. (member. ADR Section. 1993; Ethics Committee, 1974-77; Client Relations and Fee Disputes Arbitration Committee, 1974--; Labor and Employment Law Section, 1976--; Executive Committee, 1984-); Beverly Hills Bar Assn. (member, Labor Law and ADR Sections, 1994--); Century City Bar Assn. (member, Labor Law Section, 1980--); International Academy of Mediators, 1997--.

Teaching/Publications: Visiting Lecturer, Univ. of Calif. Los Angeles School of Law, 1985; Calif. State Bar lecturer for MCLE credit in Employment Discrimination Litigation. Contributing Editor, Calif. Practice Handbook . “Employment Discrimination Litigation,” Matthew Bender, 1992: Co- author, "Public Policy Wrongful Termination Actions.” Los Angeles Lawyer. Oct. 1992.

Education: J. D. ( 1967, Order of the Coif, Editor in Chief, UCLA L. Rev.) Univ. of Calif. Los Angeles School of Law; B.A. (1962) Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire.

Admission: Admitted to Calif. State Bar in 1967; also admitted to U.S. Supreme Court, 1983, and U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 1979.

Office Address: 

Law Offices of Stefan M. Mason, Esq.
886 Cheltenham Road
Santa Barbara, CA 93105
Telephone: 805.687.7147

Also on the panel of MA.
Holds certifications of training in mediation from Pepperdine University School of Law and the Center for Dispute Resolution.
Specializes in labor and employment law disputes.

 ATTORNEYS' COMMENTS

Demeanor/Personality
            Stefan Mason was described by respondents as a "very calm” person who is "not overbearing,” and is able to instill confidence in litigants. "He makes the parties think he is listening to them - because he is - but also that they are heard. He is sensitive in that respect." "He presents a calm. reasoned persona.” “He knows what the attorneys and parties are going through and you are somehow reassured that he understands, that he empathizes with you.” “He is very calm and his calmness is contagious.” 

Knowledge/Expertise
            This neutral is known for his employment law expertise, and the interviewed people who brought him employment cases said they were satisfied with his knowledge of the field. “He is excellent with the law. He keeps up with all the aspects involved in employment law - not only the employment law, but also the ADR aspect. He is current on both. “It was not the type of situation where I found myself trying to educate the mediator.” Another employment law specialist from a well-known California firm confirmed, “He recognized the issues and knew the law.”

Efficiency
            Most of the attorneys who were polled related that cases involving employment law seem more prone than most to run late, and he will go the distance. “It does take time to allow the parties to have their say.” “One of mine went until 2:00 a.m. and another until 10:00 p.m.” “It takes a while with him. The presentation in the beginning can get long.” “The earliest I've gotten out was 10:00 p.m.” “We went from 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and while he did bring in lunch - he will do that - we got no dinner, so we all ate very late that evening, but we did have a settlement!”

In Arbitration
            Most of the attorneys interviewed had mediations with Mr. Mason, but one plaintiffs’ lawyer did volunteer, “He is an exceptional arbitrator in employment cases."

In Mediation
            The plaintiffs' attorneys who were surveyed rated his skill with mediation somewhere between “good,” and “exceptional.” “He is an exceptional mediator in employment cases.” “Although he is not my first choice, he does a good job.”
  Several defense attorneys compared him favorably to retired judges. “He is much more effective than retired judges who tend to try to make a decision, whereas he tries more to mediate.” “He has training and a lot of experience with mediation and employment law, even more than a retired Judge would have.” “He did a good job.” “He is a good bet for mediations."
   Some defense litigators mentioned that he does not automatically go after the one with the money. “If there is no liability for the employer, he might give a cost-of-defense argument but he won't take a how-deep-are-your-pockets approach.” “The defense was offering real money so he didn't manhandle us. He concentrated his efforts on the plaintiff.”
  Pre-hearing briefing was not wasted on this mediator, according to respondents. “We filed pre-hearing, confidential mediation briefs and he did read them.” “He is generally familiar with the law but it's your job to lay it out in the brief.”
  Mediations were said to being with a short group meeting during which the parties could air their grievances. “There was a short plenary session with opening statements and the parties were able to vent and feel they'd been heard.” “He knows the plaintiffs self-worth is often involved in their job and he is helpful in dealing with that.” “He realizes mediation is a substitute for the parties’ day in court, so he lets them look each other in the eye and say, “You wronged me!” “There was a presentation at the beginning. First the plaintiff spoke, then the plaintiff’s attorney, then the defense attorney, then the defendant, and it took about two hours.”
  Once the mediation is rolling in earnest, it was reported that he concentrates on calmly explaining the realities of the case to the parties in “shuttle diplomacy” fashion. “He would say, ‘Having looked at the case, I'd rather have their side,’” “He sees the major purpose of mediation as being to calm down the parties so a fair amount of time was spent discussing the strengths and weaknesses.” “After the initial presentation, he breaks everyone into groups.” “He provides a non-emotional, reasoned approach.”
  Tenacity and reasonableness were considered to be the hallmarks of this mediator's style. “He works very, very hard and keeps all the parties talking.” “When all looks lost, he doesn’t give up.” “He is very dedicated. All three of mine settled, but not until after long hours. One even went until 2:00 a.m.!” “Even though he had another very intense mediation the next day, he still stayed until 10:00 p.m. to get our case settled.” “He knows people change their minds if they're allowed to go and come back the next day, so he keeps you there and makes sure everyone signs the documents before they leave.” “He is not abusive. In fact, he is pretty sensitive and he lets the parties talk to one another.” “He has a pretty reasonable approach. He isn't rough.” “He spent a lot of time pressing the law and reasoning with the lawyers.” “He didn't have to manhandle us because we came in reasonable. The defense had real money on the table and he explained that to the plaintiff. I'm not sure whether he used force with my opponent but he did close a large gap.” “He doesn't seem the type to be overbearing.”
  Several attorneys reported leaving their mediations without having 1earned his opinion. “He is not an ‘evaluative’ mediator. He is not inclined to suggest a value even if the parties are deadlocked.” “In one of my cases, the parties were deadlocked and he did not give his opinion but we were so far apart, it was appropriate that he did not.”
  One attorney was also grateful for a bit of his advice. “He advised me in private that the parties may get mad and say some difficult things but that I shouldn’t respond in kind. It was good advice and important to remember.” Another was grateful for his ability to protect confidences. “He has to be good with keeping confidences. It's part of his job, but he does keep them and he gives a spiel in the beginning about how he will do it. But, to be safe, always tell him if something is confidential and he will keep it that way."

Proclivities
            There was general agreement among respondents from both sides of the bar that Mr. Mason is unbiased. “He is neither pro-management nor pro-emp1oyee. He seems to evaluate the case on its merits.” “He is very good and very fair.” “He has done both sides of employment cases. He has represented management and represented employees.”
  The defense attorneys who were interviewed conceded that Mr. Mason has litigated on behalf of both sides, but most opined that this worked to their advantage because he knows both sides of the fence, and it gives him credibility with both sides. “He was with Munger, Tolles & Olsen, and he had more of a background representing employers, but he stopped fifteen or so years ago. On my last case, the plaintiffs' attorney recommended him.” “In one case, opposing counsel knew him personally and had litigated against him in the past. They had a lot of respect for one another but that didn't play to my disadvantage. In fact, it might have worked for me because he already had credibility with my opposing counsel.”

Availability
            He was considered to be “busy” by interviewees, but no one complained that they could not get a date within a reasonable time. “He is busy but he’s fine about setting a date. He is willing to work with you and you can usually get a date within a month, earlier if there’s been a cancellation.” “If you have trouble with the terms of the settlement after the hearing, you can go back to him.” “Karla, his assistant, is on the ball and gets you the information needed right away. She returns calls immediately.”

Cost
            There were no complaints about his fees. “His cost is comparable to others, and even less than a retired judge.”