(a) A judicial appointee shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person's attorney, the right to be heard according to law.

(b) A judicial appointee may encourage parties to a proceeding and their attorneys to settle matters in dispute but shall not act in a manner that coerces any party into settlement.

[1] The right to be heard is an essential component of a fair and impartial system of justice. Substantive rights of litigants can be protected only if procedures protecting the right to be heard are observed.

[2] Increasingly, judicial appointees have before them self-represented litigants whose lack of knowledge about the law and about judicial procedures and requirements may inhibit their ability to be heard effectively. A judicial appointee's obligation under Rule 18-202.2 to remain fair and impartial does not preclude the judicial appointee from making reasonable accommodations to protect a self-represented litigant's right to be heard, so long as those accommodations do not give the self-represented litigant an unfair advantage. This Rule does not require a judicial appointee to make any particular accommodation.

[3] Settlement conferences and referrals to alternative dispute resolution may play an important role in the administration of justice. A judicial appointee may play an important role in overseeing the settlement of disputes, but should be careful that efforts to further settlement do not undermine any party's right to be heard according to law. Among the factors that a judicial appointee should consider when deciding upon an appropriate settlement practice for a case are (a) whether the parties have requested or voluntarily consented to a certain level of participation by the judicial appointee in settlement discussions, (b) whether the parties and their attorneys are relatively sophisticated in legal matters, (c) whether the case will be tried by a judge or a jury, (d) whether the parties participate with their attorneys in settlement discussions, (e) whether any parties are self-represented, and (f) the nature of the proceeding.

[4] Judicial appointees must be mindful of the effect settlement discussions can have, not only on their objectivity and impartiality, but also on the appearance of their objectivity and impartiality. A judicial appointee should keep in mind the effect that the judicial appointee's participation in settlement discussions may have on both the judicial appointee's own views of the case and the perceptions of the attorneys and the parties if the case remains with the judicial appointee after settlement efforts are unsuccessful. Despite a judicial appointee's best efforts, there may be instances when information obtained during settlement discussions could influence a judicial appointee's decision-making during proceedings, and, in such instances, the judicial appointee should consider whether disqualification may be appropriate. See Rule 18-202.11 (a)(1).

Source: This Rule is derived from former Rule 2.6 of Rule 16-814 (2016).