§ 5949. Confidential mediation communications and documents.
(a) General rule.--Except as provided in subsection (b), all mediation communications and mediation documents
are privileged. Disclosure of mediation communications and mediation documents may
not be required or compelled through discovery or any other process. Mediation communications
and mediation documents shall not be admissible as evidence in any action or proceeding,
including, but not limited to, a judicial, administrative or arbitration action or
proceeding.
(b) Exceptions.--
(1) A settlement document may be introduced in an action or proceeding to enforce the
settlement agreement expressed in the document, unless the settlement document by
its terms states that it is unenforceable or not intended to be legally binding.
(2) To the extent that the communication or conduct is relevant evidence in a criminal
matter, the privilege and limitation set forth in subsection (a) does not apply to:
(i) a communication of a threat that bodily injury may be inflicted on a person;
(ii) a communication of a threat that damage may be inflicted on real or personal property
under circumstances constituting a felony; or
(iii) conduct during a mediation session causing direct bodily injury to a person.
(3) The privilege and limitation set forth under subsection (a) does not apply to a fraudulent
communication during mediation that is relevant evidence in an action to enforce or
set aside a mediated agreement reached as a result of that fraudulent communication.
(4) Any document which otherwise exists, or existed independent of the mediation and is
not otherwise covered by this section, is not subject to this privilege.
(c) Definitions.--As used in this section, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings given
to them in this subsection:
"Mediation." The deliberate and knowing use of a third person by disputing parties to help them
reach a resolution of their dispute. For purposes of this section, mediation commences
at the time of initial contact with a mediator or mediation program.
"Mediation communication." A communication, verbal or nonverbal, oral or written, made by, between or among a
party, mediator, mediation program or any other person present to further the mediation
process when the communication occurs during a mediation session or outside a session
when made to or by the mediator or mediation program.
"Mediation document." Written material, including copies, prepared for the purpose of, in the course of
or pursuant to mediation. The term includes, but is not limited to, memoranda, notes,
files, records and work product of a mediator, mediation program or party.
"Mediation program." A plan or organization through which mediators or mediation may be provided.
"Mediator." A person who performs mediation.
"Settlement document." A written agreement signed by the parties to the agreement.
(Feb. 7, 1996, P.L.7, No.3, eff. 60 days)
1996 Amendment. Act 3 added section 5949.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
11
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 2000–2025 · leading case:
Fair v. Bakhtiari, 147 P.3d 653 (Cal. 2006).
Fair v. Bakhtiari, 147 P.3d 653 (Cal. 2006).
· cites it 2× “1(/); 42 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 5949(b)(1) & (c); Va.”
Sheldone v. Pennsylvania Tpk. Comm'n, 104 F. Supp. 2d 511 (W.D. Pa. 2000).
· cites it 2× “5 Finally, the Court notes that the elements listed above are by no means intended to be an exhaustive recitation of the standards governing the mediation privilege.”
Sampson v. Sch. Dist. of Lancaster, 262 F.R.D. 469 (E.D. Pa. 2008).
“See 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 5949(a) (providing that "all mediation communications and mediation documents are privileged”).”
Exec. Risk Indem. Inc. v. Cigna Corp., 81 Pa. D. & C.4th 410 (2006).
· cites it 2× “23 The Pennsylvania mediation privilege is codified at 42 Pa.C.S. §5949: “(a) General rule. Except as provided in subsection (b), all mediation communications and mediation documents are privileged.”
Stewart Title Guar. Co. v. Owlett & Lewis, P.C., 297 F.R.D. 232 (M.D. Penn. 2013).
“§ 5949, and, in its motion, Owlett seeks an order requiring Stewart Title to return the mediation memo and precluding Stewart Title from using or referring to the memo in any manner in any future proceedings in this case including, as we understand Owlett’s request, any use of…”
Com. of PA, OAG v. The Baroness Consulting & Mediation, LLC & J. Von Schmeling (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2025).
· cites it 8× “4011(d) (prohibiting discovery of mediation communications and mediation documents set forth in 42 Pa.C.S. § 5949). The purpose of the Mediation Privilege has been cogently described by federal courts interpreting its reach: If participants cannot rely on the confidential…”
Aetna Inc. v. Lexington Ins., 76 Pa. D. & C.4th 19 (2005).
· cites it 2× “The pertinent Pennsylvania Statute, 42 Pa.C.S. §5949, states: “Mediation communications .”
Gavurnik v. Vantage Labs, LLC (E.D. Pa. 2022).
“) In opposing the motion, Gavurnik relies on the factual timeline—namely, that the EEOC had cancelled the scheduled mediation and the parties had not yet rescheduled mediation and thus they were not in the midst of the mediation—to argue that the federal mediation privilege does…”
Mongeluzzi v. Pansini, 61 Pa. D. & C.4th 52 (2001).
“See 42 Pa.C.S. §5949. . Defendants also represented Kathryn Costello, Joleen Keyser, and Louise Byrd, however no written fee agreements with those PECO action plaintiffs were identified or introduced at trial.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5949(a) — 2 cases
Sampson v. Sch. Dist. of Lancaster, 262 F.R.D. 469 (E.D. Pa. 2008).
“See 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 5949(a) (providing that "all mediation communications and mediation documents are privileged”).”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5949(b) — 1 case
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5949(b)(1) — 3 cases
Fair v. Bakhtiari, 147 P.3d 653 (Cal. 2006).
“1(/); 42 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. § 5949(b)(1) & (c); Va.”
Sheldone v. Pennsylvania Tpk. Comm'n, 104 F. Supp. 2d 511 (W.D. Pa. 2000).
“5 Finally, the Court notes that the elements listed above are by no means intended to be an exhaustive recitation of the standards governing the mediation privilege.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5949(b)(4) — 1 case
Sheldone v. Pennsylvania Tpk. Comm'n, 104 F. Supp. 2d 511 (W.D. Pa. 2000).
“5 Finally, the Court notes that the elements listed above are by no means intended to be an exhaustive recitation of the standards governing the mediation privilege.”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5949(c) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.