For more on Elizabeth’s publications see her resumé.
|2015||The Psychology and Neurobiology of Mediation, 17 Cardozo J. of Conflict Resol. 363.||Trauma and the IDR Cycle. In depth discussion of the work of Stephen Porges and Peter Levine.|
|2011||Self, Identity and the IDR Cycle: Understanding the Deeper Meaning of ‘Face’ in Mediation, Int’l J. of Applied Psychoanal. Studies, Wiley Online Library. See abstract here.||A version of Elizabeth’s scholarly article for the psychotherapeutic community.|
|2010||The Psychology of Mediation (II): The IDR Cycle, A New Model For Understanding Mediation. Read here.||A discussion of the IDR cycle in a readable format on mediate.com.|
|2010||The Psychology of Mediation, Part I: The Mediator’s Issues of Self and Identity, (January 2010). Read here.||The basics of the psychology of mediation on mediate.com.|
|2010||The Psychology of Mediation: Issues of Self and Identity and the IDR Cycle, 10 Pepp. Disp. Res. L.J. 183 (2010).||Award-winning interdisciplinary article on the psychology of mediation.|
|2009||Confidentiality in Collaborative Cases After Thottam.
Press here for this article on mediate.com.
|Mediation confidentiality analyzed.|
|2005||Mediation Confidentiality, Chapter 7 in:
A Litigator’s Guide to Effective Use of ADR in California (Continuing Education of the Bar, 2005).
|California law on mediation confidentiality analyzed.|
|2004||Mediation Confidentiality: What Litigators Need to Know After Rojas v. Superior Court, 26(5) Cal. Civ. Litig. Rep., Oct. 2004, 189-194.||The impact of Rojas v. Superior Court (2004) 33 Cal.4th 407 on mediation practice.|
|2004||Rojas v. Superior Court, 26(15) Ins. Litig. Rep., Sept.10, 2004, p. 536||For insurance coverage litigators.|
|2004||Defects in Construction: Will California’s Mediation Confidentiality Statutes Still Remain Standing after Rojas v. Superior Court? 14(3) Cal. Construction L. Rep., 2004, 97-103||For construction defect litigators.|
|2004||Confidentiality in Insurance Coverage Mediation: Will It Survive Rojas v. Superior Court?, 26(2) Ins. Litig. Rep., Feb. 2004, 37-51.||Predicts the Rojas case.|
|2003||Using Hard Facts to Clarify Good Law: A Principled Approach to Rojas v. Superior Court and the Interpretation of California’s Mediation Confidentiality Statutes (Evid. Code §§ 1115 et seq.), XXIV (10) California Tort Rep., Nov. – Dec. 2003, pp. 343-363.||Closely predicts the California Supreme Court’s later opinion.|
|Publications on Insurance|
|2004||Confidentiality in Insurance Coverage Mediation: Will It Survive Rojas v. Superior Court?, Ins. Litig. Rep., 26(2), Feb. 2004, pp. 37-51.||Mediation confidentiality article with emphasis on insurance mediation. Predicts reasoning and decision in Rojas v. Superior Court.|
|1989||Strategies for Defeating and Defending the 1973 Pollution Exclusion, 11(3) Ins. Litig. Rep., March 1989, 75 – 87.||Decisions on the pollution exclusion throughout the country are analyzed.|
|1987||Automobile Insurance, Chapter 50 in: California Insurance Law & Practice (Matthew Bender 1987). Updated by publisher.||Chapter on automobile insurance in treatise.|
|1985||California Insurer’s Duty to Defend: How Far Does It Extend?, 1985, 52 Ins. Counsel J. 252.||The duty to defend. Cited by the Court of Appeal in Garvey v. State Farm (1986) 191 Cal.App.3d 1248, 1255 fn. 6. The California Supreme Court later granted review in Garvey and issued the important opinion in Garvey v. State Farm (1989) 48 Cal.3d 395.|
|Civil Litigation & Procedure/Anti-SLAPP Statute & Miscellaneous|
|2003||Appeal From Superior Court Judgment, Chapter 14 in: California Administrative Mandamus (Continuing Education of the Bar, 2003).||California appellate procedure for litigators of administrative mandamus actions.|
|1991||California’s Powerful Anti-SLAPP Statute: Litigating After Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & Opportunity, (May 1999) 21(3) CEB Civil Litig. Rep., (1991) 1, 82-87. With Mark Goldowitz.||Discussion of Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & Opportunity (1999) 19 Cal.4th 1106.|
|1994-2001||California Administrative Mandamus, Updates. (Continuing Education of the Bar Updates, 1994-2001).||Law of administrative mandamus (a form of appeal to the superior court used to challenge decisions in hospital peer review proceedings and other administrative proceedings).|
|1989||Homeless Odyssey, California Lawyer, October 1989.||A short story by Elizabeth on her work with the homeless.|
|1979||Traumatic Medicine & Surgery for the Attorney, 1979. Executive Editor. (Matthew Bender & Co., 1979.)||A treatise for lawyers on medicine.|
|1979||In Matthew Bender’s Gray’s Attorneys’ Textbook of Medicine and Courtroom Medicine: Editor/writer on medicine.||Same.|