California Evidence Code section 1115 is the definitions statute that turns on mediation confidentiality in California. It defines three terms — mediation, mediator, and mediation consultation — and once your interaction falls inside any of those definitions, one of the strongest confidentiality shields in the country attaches to everything said, written, and exchanged in connection with the process. The rule is deliberately broad, and it applies to conversations most people would not think to guard.
The Three Definitions That Turn Confidentiality On
Section 1115 gives you the boundary line for the entire chapter. A mediation is a process where a neutral person helps disputing parties communicate and work toward an agreement they can both accept. A mediator is that neutral person, and the term also covers anyone the mediator designates to assist or to communicate with participants in preparation for the process. A mediation consultation is any communication with a mediator for the purpose of starting, considering, resuming, or hiring a mediator for a mediation.1California Legislative Information. California Code Evidence Code 1115 – Definitions
If an interaction fits one of those three categories, the confidentiality rules in sections 1116 through 1129 apply. If it does not, they do not. That is why the initial phone call to a prospective mediator matters as much as the session itself: it already qualifies as a mediation consultation, and confidentiality is already in force.
What Confidentiality Actually Blocks
Section 1119 does the heavy lifting. Nothing said and no admission made during a mediation or mediation consultation can be used as evidence, obtained through discovery, or forced into disclosure in any civil proceeding, arbitration, or administrative hearing. The rule covers every document prepared for the mediation, whether a draft proposal, a set of handwritten notes, or an internal spreadsheet built for the negotiation. All communications and settlement discussions between participants stay confidential.2California Legislative Information. California Evidence Code 1119
The Legislature made the scope this wide on purpose. It wanted parties to speak freely, and the way it got there was to make mediation communications almost untouchable afterward.
When Protection Starts and When It Ends
Protection kicks in the moment parties agree to mediate or first communicate with a mediator about hiring one. No formal session is required.
Section 1125 sets out when a mediation is over for confidentiality purposes. A mediation that fully resolves the dispute ends when any of the following happens:3California Legislative Information. California Code Evidence Code 1125
- The parties sign a written agreement that fully resolves the dispute.
- The parties reach an oral agreement that fully resolves the dispute and record it in compliance with section 1118.
- The mediator gives participants a signed writing stating the mediation is over.
- A party gives written notice to the mediator and all other participants that the mediation is over. In multi-party cases, the remaining participants may continue.
- Ten calendar days pass with no communication between the mediator and any party about the dispute. The parties and mediator can shorten or extend that window by agreement.
A partial resolution ends the mediation as to the resolved issues once the parties sign a partial written settlement or reach a qualifying partial oral agreement. A party can walk away at any time without a deal. And confidentiality survives the end of the mediation. What was said stays protected long after the session is closed.
What Falls Outside the Chapter
Not every process that looks like mediation qualifies. Section 1117 carves out two categories. The chapter does not apply to certain proceedings under the Family Code, including child custody evaluations and related family mediation processes. It also does not apply to judicial settlement conferences held under the California Rules of Court.4California Legislative Information. California Evidence Code 1117 If you are attending either, different disclosure rules govern.
Keeping a Settlement Enforceable
The same confidentiality that protects negotiation would, by default, prevent a court from ever seeing the agreement you reached. Sections 1123 and 1124 solve that by laying out the steps required to make a mediated settlement admissible.
Written Agreements
A written settlement agreement prepared during mediation is admissible if the settling parties sign it and it meets at least one of these conditions:5California Legislative Information. California Evidence Code 1123
- The agreement states that it is admissible or subject to disclosure.
- The agreement states that it is enforceable or binding.
- All parties expressly agree to its disclosure.
- The agreement is used to show fraud, duress, or illegality relevant to the dispute.
The statute allows “words to that effect,” but courts read that phrase strictly. Vague language is the most common reason a mediated agreement fails at enforcement.
Oral Agreements
Oral agreements reached during mediation are admissible only if they satisfy the demanding requirements of section 1118:6California Legislative Information. California Evidence Code 1118
- A court reporter or reliable audio recording must capture the agreement.
- The terms must be recited on the record with the parties and mediator present, and each party must confirm agreement on the record.
- The parties must state on the record that the agreement is enforceable or binding.
- The recording must be reduced to writing and signed by the parties within 72 hours.
Section 1124 offers limited alternatives when the “enforceable or binding” statement was not made on the record: the agreement can still come in if all parties separately consent to disclosure, or if it is offered to prove fraud, duress, or illegality.7California Legislative Information. California Code Evidence Code 1124 Miss any of the required steps, and the deal you thought you had may not be enforceable.
The Exceptions That Exist
Evidence That Already Existed
Section 1120 makes clear that evidence you could have used in court before the mediation does not lose that status just because someone brought it into the room.8California Legislative Information. California Evidence Code 1120 A financial document created months before the dispute is still admissible and discoverable, even if a party handed a copy to the mediator. What is protected are the communications and writings created for the mediation, not documents with an independent existence.
Everyone Agrees
Section 1122 allows disclosure if every participant expressly agrees, either in writing or orally under section 1118’s recording requirements. All participants includes the mediator, and the mediator’s consent also binds any assistants the mediator designated. There is a narrower path for documents prepared by fewer than all participants: those authors can consent to disclose their own materials, but only if the documents do not reveal anything said or admitted during the session.9California Legislative Information. California Code Evidence Code 1122
The Malpractice Trap
The most consequential feature of this framework is one many clients do not learn until it hurts them. In Cassel v. Superior Court, the California Supreme Court held that section 1119 bars all communications made during or in connection with a mediation from later use, including private conversations between a client and their own attorney that no one else heard.10Stanford Law School. Cassel v. Superior Court, 51 Cal. 4th 113 If your lawyer pressures you into a bad deal, gives you incompetent advice about your case, or misstates the terms in a caucus room, you generally cannot use what was said in the mediation to prove it in a malpractice case.
The court said a malpractice exception was the Legislature’s job. As of 2026, the Legislature has not created one. What it did instead was add section 1129, an informed-consent requirement. Before a client agrees to participate in mediation, the client’s attorney must provide a printed disclosure explaining the section 1119 confidentiality restrictions and obtain the client’s signed acknowledgment.11California Legislative Information. California Evidence Code 1129 The statute’s safe-harbor form spells out the consequence bluntly: communications between you and your attorney made in preparation for or during a mediation are confidential and cannot be used, even if you later sue your attorney for malpractice over what happened in the mediation.
Treat California’s mediation confidentiality as a double-edged shield. It keeps your candid admissions away from the other side, and it keeps your own lawyer’s conduct in the session out of a later malpractice case.
If Your Case Might Land in Federal Court
State confidentiality rules are not the whole story if federal jurisdiction is possible. Federal Rule of Evidence 408 covers settlement negotiations but is narrower than section 1119. Rule 408 prohibits using settlement offers or statements made during negotiations to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a claim, but it allows the same evidence in for other purposes, such as showing a witness’s bias, negating a claim of undue delay, or proving obstruction of a criminal investigation.12Legal Information Institute. Federal Rule of Evidence 408 – Compromise Offers and Negotiations Section 1119 blocks mediation evidence regardless of the purpose. A statement protected under California law can be admissible in federal court if the purpose falls outside Rule 408’s list. Whether state or federal rules govern in a particular federal case depends on the underlying claims, so raise the question with counsel early if federal court is a realistic possibility.