Rule 46.Immunity
Current through December 29, 2025 · Last verified July 8, 2026
Full Text of Rule 46
Amendment History
[Amended by order adopted November 27, 2001, effective January 1, 2002 and by order entered and effective December 1, 2005.]
Plain-English Summary
One sentence, and it borrows a standard rather than writing one. Mediators and premediation screeners have immunity in the same manner and to the same extent as a family court judge.
The protection matters because of what Rules 39 and 43 ask of these people. A screener meets each party separately and privately, forms a view about whether the case should be mediated at all, and may report suspected abuse. A mediator hears settlement discussions in confidence and reports an outcome to the court.
Pairing that with Rule 43(d) — under which neither may be subpoenaed or called to testify about the dispute — the ruleset keeps both roles outside the litigation they serve.
Frequently Asked Questions
What immunity do mediators have?
The same immunity, in the same manner and to the same extent, as a family court judge.
Does it cover premediation screeners?
Yes. The rule names mediators and premediation screeners together.
Can a mediator be compelled to testify?
No. Rule 43(d) provides that no premediation screener or mediator may be subpoenaed, called to testify, or otherwise subjected to process requiring disclosure of confidential information in any proceeding relating to or arising out of the dispute mediated.
Why is the immunity needed?
Screeners and mediators form and report views, in confidence, about parties in contested family cases; the immunity places them on the same footing as the judge whose process they serve.
Does immunity apply to parent educators?
The rule names mediators and premediation screeners.