RUBIN, J.
On August 25, 2020, Plaintiffs Paul Griffith, Caroline W. Griffith, Susan M. Flaherty, and John J. Flaherty, Jr. appeared for a hearing via zoom on various motions, including Motion of Defendant, Edward W. Gately, Trustee of Hidden Meadow II Realty Trust, to Dismiss Count I of the Amended Complaint for Lack of Jurisdiction (and Plaintiffs' opposition thereto), Motion of Defendant, Edward W. Gately, Trustee of Hidden Meadow II Realty Trust, for Judgment on the Pleadings or in the Alternative Dismiss Count II of the Amended Complaint (and Plaintiffs' Cross-Motion), Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Submitted by Defendant, Edward W. Gately, Trustee of Hidden Meadow II Realty Trust. Following the zoom hearing, counsel for both parties agreed that the case may be suitable for mediation. This court is convinced that this case may be capable of being resolved by the parties, and that the parties would benefit greatly by having a trained neutral serve as a mediator. To this end, the court exercises the authority vested in it to refer the case for mandatory mediation screening by a court-affiliated provider and encourages the parties to mediate by zoom during the pandemic. If, following screening, the parties are not prepared to mediate, or if after engaging in mediation, the case is not resolved consensually, the court will hear and determine the case.
Pursuant to Supreme Judicial Court Rule 1:18, "Uniform Rules on Dispute Resolution," the court enters the following order for referral of this case to one of the Land Court Department's court-connected dispute resolution services. It is
ORDERED that this case, Land Court Miscellaneous 20 MISC 000036 (DRR), is REFERRED for a mediation screening to
REBA Dispute Resolution, Inc.
295 Devonshire Street
Sixth Floor
Boston, MA 02110
(617) 854-7555
adr@reba.net
one of the court's approved court-connected dispute resolution services. [Note 1] It is further
ORDERED that the parties contact REBA Dispute Resolution, Inc. (or the provider chosen pursuant to footnote one) to schedule a mediation screening that is to occur as soon as possible, and in no event later November 6, 2020. It is further
ORDERED that the parties shall promptly report to the court, in writing, the outcome of the screening session and provide a written joint report to the court of the results of that screening by November 12, 2020 (whether the parties elected to proceed with mediation, name of mediator and date of mediation). The screening is to take place with all parties and their counsel personally present with a neutral on the panel of the mediation service provider. If the parties agree to proceed with alternative dispute resolution, they shall schedule and participate in that session as soon as possible, and shall immediately advise the court in writing of the particulars of their session. If, after participating in the screening session, the parties do not wish to proceed with alternative dispute resolution, or if they do, but are unable to settle their case, the parties are to notify the court in writing.
SO ORDERED.
FOOTNOTES
[Note 1] The parties are free to select any of the Land Court's court-affiliated ADR providers to conduct the mandatory screening; lists of those providers are available on the Land Court's website or from Sessions Clerk Jennifer Noonan. Unless the parties by prompt agreement elect to use another of the affiliated providers, the screening is to be conducted by a neutral on the panel of the provider indicated in this Order.