Miami Business Alliance - Zachary A. Emmanouil - Best Commercial Mediator In Miami.

International Commercial & Business Mediator

Zachary is an Complex Commercial Litigation Mediator certified in Circuit-Civil Mediation with 15 years of experience, and he focuses his International Mediation practice on International Commercial cases, both in-suit and pre-suit.

There are 5 key attributes that really set Mr. Emmanouil apart from other mediators:

1. Zachary has both Complex Commercial Litigation and Executive Business Experience.

Many attorneys, while knowledgeable in the legal field, understandably lack executive business experience. Consequently, corporate officers and directors may often be presented with a dilemma - whether to accept an attorney’s ultra conservative legal advice, or simply proceed with established (albeit risky) executive business practices. Under such circumstances, it is important for an attorney to possess and combine both legal and business experience to obtain a balance, and thus propose reasonable real-world business solutions that provide a calculated level of legal protection.

Zachary served as the President of a company where he ran the day-to-day operations of the company, and was chiefly responsible for developing, managing, and protecting the company's relationships with its wholesale customers in the U.S., Brazil, and Europe. Through his leadership, Zachary grew the company quickly and more profitable.

Since then, Zachary has consulted CEOs and Boards of various companies, in all stages of growth, and on several matters, from both a legal and business perspective.

Zachary represented a corporate plaintiff in a $25 million Civil RICO case against a Fortune 250 Company on a contingency fee basis, and he secured a favorable confidential settlement for his client.

Moreover, the largest transaction Zachary has negotiated exceeded $1.2 Billion.

In order to better understand Zachary's application of both his legal and executive business experience in mediation - especially within the context of mediating disputes before a lawsuit is filed, please read his article title "Integrating Legal, Business, and Mediation Experience in Pre-Suit Mediation" by clicking here.

2. Zachary looks beyond the pleadings to figure out what is really going on.

Through his 20+ years of experience as an Attorney, Zachary realized that the real reason that many commercial litigation cases are filed and fought really have little to do with what the pleadings say. Zachary has the unique gift and ability to see past the pleadings, and see past boiler-plate language in a contract, to figure out what is really going on between the parties. Often times in such cases, most mediators fail to get a case settled because they fail to realize that the first step to settle a case is actually to resolve the real underlying issues and problems between the parties first. If a mediator like Zachary brings to light and resolves the real underlying problems between the parties, then the case (as filed, prosecuted, and defended) becomes much easier to settle.

3. Zachary thinks way outside the box.

Most mediators only know how to settle cases where one party simply pays money to another party - boring! But not only is this boring but, much more importantly, often times leads to an impasse and no settlement. This is because most mediators lack the special skills and creativity to find a unique way to think outside the box in order to settle a case. What sets Zachary apart from virtually all other mediators is that Zachary examines a dispute from a thousand different angles in order to formulate a few different solutions that are completely unexpected and "never thought of" by either party.

As one of many different examples, and very briefly, Zachary settled one particular pre-suit case by thinking outside the box as follows: Plaintiff (a retailer) had a claim against a Defendant (a manufacturer) for $5.8 million, and the Defendant had a counter-claim for $2.3 million. During mediation, each party had 2 to 3 lawyers and 1 to 2 paralegals on each side of the conference table. Both sides spent over an hour on their opening. At the end of the table, the Plaintiff CEO had fire in his eyes while looking at the Defendant CEO, who never made eye contact with the Plaintiff CEO. Thereafter, Zachary advised everyone that he had read all of the submitted pleadings and supporting documents, but asked what the underlying reason was as to why the parties came to this dispute when the alleged breaches occurred many years prior. No one answered, and Mr. Emmanouil said that if they did not tell him, then he would find out on his own. After 3 to 4 hours, Zachary asked to speak with the Plaintiff CEO in private, and Zachary asked him "how long has the Defendant CEO been having an affair with your wife?" Then the Plaintiff CEO, who was in total shock, asked "How did you find out?!?! Who told you?!?!" and Zachary responded "Just now, for you, and I told you that I would eventually find out." It was important for Mr. Emmanouil to find out what the real underlying issue was first. Thereafter, Zachary was able to think way outside the box to find a solution. Briefly, Zachary also had to explain to the Plaintiff CEO that it wasn't just the Defendant's CEO's fault, but also his wife's fault and his own fault. Thereafter, Zachary had the Defendant CEO privately verbally apologize. As to $5.8 million and $2.3 million claims, Zachary proposed that the Defendant CEO step down for a period of 18 months, during which time his brother would act as interim CEO. Also, instead of Defendant's company selling the products to Plaintiff's company at "X" dollars, the price would be reduced by "Y" percent for "Z" amount of products. In this manner, Zachary was able to salvage a business relationship where not only did both parties still make some money but, just as importantly, both parties could still stay in business and continue to employee many of their employees and their respective families that were innocent bystanders in the dispute between the CEOs of both companies. In addition, Zachary's proposal regarding the 18-month period was to allow sufficient time to heal both CEO's emotional wounds. At the conclusion of the mediation, all of the attorneys for both sides, as well as the CEOs from both companies, expressed to Zachary that they never thought that anyone would have been able to settle their dispute, and especially the way that Zachary did. Mr. Emmanouil hears this from many other attorneys and their respective clients very often.

4. Where necessary, Zachary engages in a very "aggressive" approach with clients and their unrealistic expectations.

Zachary is also different from other mediators in that, if warranted, he engages in a very “aggressive” approach with clients and their unrealistic expectations, and applies a “No B.S.” attitude. As both an International Commercial Litigation Attorney and Mediator, Mr. Emmanouil has seen and heard just about everything. Accordingly, Zachary unapologetically calls “B.S.” when he sees it, and sets client's unrealistic expectations and positions in line with where they should be.

5. Zachary has a strong policy of "Get To Yes."

Finally, Zachary take a very "Pro-Active" approach in mediation - he is not a mere "mail-man" to simply go "back and forth" delivering offers and counter offers. Zachary has a strong policy of "Get To Yes" in mediation - he will do whatever it takes, and as long as it takes, to get the parties to agree to settle. Zachary is a neutral party, and his only goal is to settle the case.

In addition, the above 5 characteristics that separates Mr. Emmanouil from other mediators, below is a list of some of the other key qualities that Zachary possesses as an effective International Commercial Litigation Mediator:

▪ Experience With Similar Disputes

▪ Thinks Outside The Box

▪ Pro-Active

▪ Problem Solver

▪ Confident

▪ Earns and Establishes Trust

▪ Aggressive, yet Respectful
And Professional

▪ Effective Listening

▪ Controls the Mediation

▪ Creative & Imaginative

▪ Determined

▪ Defuses Emotional &
Adversarial Exchanges

There are several advantages to attending mediation over litigating in court. Some of these advantages are as follows:

▪ Money and Time.

Mediation provides parties an opportunity to resolve their disputes immediately without incurring additional attorney’s fees and costs. Moreover, parties can finally put their disputes behind them and spend time focusing on other matters.

▪ Customized and Workable Solutions.

Mediation provides parties an opportunity to resolve their disputes in various different ways that would likely not be available in Court. For example, such customized solutions can include making payments in installments over time, providing additional or even different products or services as a set-off, providing extended warranties, providing an assignment of benefits, or providing any other solution that would likely not be available in Court.

▪ Certainty.

One of the greatest fears is “fear of the unknown.” Litigators often use the term “rolling the dice” when referring to going to trial simply because there is generally no 100% guaranty as to how a jury will decide a particular case. However, mediation provides the parties an opportunity to obtain certainty. Rather than leaving the parties’ fate in the hands of total strangers (the jury), mediation empowers the parties to control the outcome of their dispute and thus eliminate the element of surprise and uncertainty.

▪ Less Adversarial.

Mediation allows the parties the opportunity to settle their disputes in an environment that is generally less adversarial than going to court. While this is advantageous during mediation, it can also be advantageous after mediation because mediation can make termination of the business relationship more civil and amicable, or even help to preserve the business relationship and allow it to continue.

▪ Confidential.

Unlike litigation where testimony, allegations, responses, and documents are generally of public record, everything that is discussed and shared in mediation is confidential (except where disclosure is required by law, such as knowledge of abuse of children or the elderly). Confidentiality is crucial in mediation because it allows the mediator, the attorneys, and the parties to more fully understand and focus on all of the primary issues and the risks of the litigation, without airing their confidential business practices or confidential financial or pricing information in public.