Michael P. Graff, Esq.

Serving Greater New York with Privacy-Creativity-Economy
161 West 61st Street
11th Floor
New York, New York 10023


Areas Of Practice

Personal Injury
Real Estate



Dispute Resolution Experience




Resolved, by negotiation, mediation, arbitration or litigation, over 2000 cases, in varied industries, particularly in contract, consulting, construction, employment discrimination, healthcare, insurance, manufacturing, marketing, printing and packaging, real estate (including coops and condominiums), commercial leasing), textiles and utilities.   In the labor relations and employment law field, on behalf of management, including an association of private hospitals, voluntary hospitals and other industries on all aspects of labor-management relations; and on behalf of employees, trying to verdict or award or mediating employment discrimination and civil rights cases. Tried to verdict as lead counsel complex contract issues, employment discrimination, personal injury and property damage contested probate and family law cases on behalf of plaintiffs and defendants.   Prepared and/or argued appeals in state and federal courts including SCOTUS.  Working knowledge of creditors' rights, based upon experience in asset-based financing transactions and negotiation on behalf of both lenders and borrowers; and enforcement of secured transactions.








Association for Conflict Resolution Greater New York;




Certified by Commerical Division of the Supreme Court, New York and Queens Counties.




Certified by N.Y. Peace Institute Mediation Program (Court and Community Mediation)




Mediated over 50 cases including for the following:




Mediation Panel, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York;




Commercial Division of New York State Supreme Court, New York County;




Commercial Division of New York State Supreme Court, Queens County:




Unified Court System Part 137 Attorney-Client Fee Disputes (NY County Lawyers);




Panelist - City Bar Mediation & Arbitration of Disputes Among Lawyers;




Panelist - City Bar Program on Mediation of Coop and Condominium Disputes;




Civil Court of the City of New York, New York and Kings Counties;




New York Peace Institute, community mediation program;








Soliya Program condicting live connection programs between students of Western Universities and Universities from Predominantly Muslim Countries.








Arbitrated over 60 cases, including as a panelist on Commercial Tribunal of AAA, New York City;


New York City Contract Dispute Resolution Board;


Civil Court, New York County;


Attorney-Client Fee Disputes (NY County Lawyers)




Bar Admissions:




State Bars of New York and Florida


Supreme Court of the United State


U. S. Courts of Appeals for the Second, Third and Sixth Circuits


Southern, Eastern and Northern Districts of New York


Southern (Trial Bar), Middle and Northern Districts of Florida


Eastern and Western Districts of Michigan


Eastern District of Wisconsin




Bar Associations:




N.Y. City Bar  2009 - present Alternate Dispute Resolution Committee; 2006-2009 Litigation Committee, Subc. on ADR in Surrogate's Court and presenter on two City Bar CLE programs on The Art of Pleading;


Queens County Bar Ass'n , Formerly Co-Chair of Labor Law Committee


National Employment Lawyers Association/New York Chapter


New York State Dispute Resolution Association


The New York and Florida Bars






Education and Training in Alternate Dispute Resolution:




Over 260 hours of Office of Court Administration approved mediation training including by Carol Liebman, Dina Jansenson and Michael Young; Margaret Shaw; Simeon Baum, Stephen J. Hochman, Adam J. Berner and Robert Collins; Continuing Legal Education training sponsored by U.S. District Courts, AAA, City Bar, ABA, New York Peace Institute, FINRA, EEOC and others on Mediation in commercial, Employment Discrimination, Construction Law Mediation and Ethics, Divorce, Child Custody and Visitation,probate disputes.




Trainer and Panelist, presenting "Tips on Effectivly representing clients in Mediation".


Alternate Dispute Resolution Advantages:


There is no "One Size Fits All" program for Alternate Dispute Resolution Services (ADR).  The objective is to tailor the program to fit the special needs and interests of the parties.  That is not to say that there is a lack of models.  It is not always necessary to reinvent the wheel.  However, the overarching objectives of ADR are as follows:


Privacy:  Court proceedings are public.  Very little that goes on in courts is private.  Publicity is a common issue.  Many parties and there disputes are hampered in revealing their needs because of concerns of privacy.


Confidentiality:  When the parties elect to engage in alternate dispute resolution, they generally agree, in writing, that all the processes and outcomes shall be confidential.  Sometimes it is appropriate for the parties to agree that the final resolution of the dispute may be submitted to a court of agency for approval or to become part of a court judgment.  In order to encourage and support ADR, many states, like New York, have statutes that preserve the confidentiality of the proceedings.


Creative and Empowering: A court must follow the strict guidline of statute and precedent.  Often a court is limited to awarding or denying an award of a sum of money that becomes due at the time of judgment.  It is "up or down." "Win" or "Lose." Not so in ADR.  In private ADR, the parties, with the help of an experienced neutral, are empowered to create a WIN-WIN solution for all parties.  For example; in an intellectual property dispute, where the court might be limited to granting an injunction and a money judgment, the neutral in ADR might suggest a patent license and a royalty agreement.  Where a sum of money is claimed, the entire sum might become immediately payable under a court judgment.  The parties are empowered to negotiate terms and avoid an unsustainable result, or creatively piece together a mutually beneficial exhange of services or goods.


Economy:  While the cost of the services of an experienced neutral is not insignificant, such costs often are much less than the costs of a procuring a litigated solution, which mount up, and even exceed the value of the case over the lengthy period of the life of a litigation.


Convenience:  In litigation, the parties, their representatives and witnesses have to appear in courts wherever they are in session, and whenever they are directed to appear.  Proceedings in courts are often delayed by crowded calendars.  In ADR, the parties are empowered to decide when and where they are to appear to resolve their dispute.

   M. Graff,

  161 West 61st Street,

  11th Floor

  New York, NY 10023-7450



  Office: 917-902-7979

   Fax:     212 246-6774