Barry Winograd
Barry Winograd

Barry Winograd has maintained a full-time dispute resolution practice since 1988 as an arbitrator and mediator of labor and employment cases, as well as business and other civil disputes. He is a member and former vice-president of the National Academy of Arbitrators, and has written a number of articles for legal journals. Mr. Winograd is listed on the rosters of dispute resolution organizations and federal and state courts. In addition, he serves as a permanent arbitrator on panels established by labor-management collective bargaining agreements.

Mr. Winograd has been on the adjunct law school faculty at the University of California, Berkeley since 1985 teaching labor law, arbitration, and mediation courses. He also has taught at the University of Michigan. His previous experience includes service as an administrative law judge for the California Public Employment Relations Board, and as an attorney for the United Farm Workers of America.

Mr. Winograd received his B.A. at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and his J.D. and LL.M. from the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law.

Columns by Barry Winograd
A Settlement for Donald Trump and Stephanie Clifford?

Guest columnist Barry Winograd—an arbitrator and mediator, and lecturer at Berkeley Law—concludes his two-part series of columns on the conflict between President Donald Trump and Stephanie Clifford, the adult film actress known as Stormy Daniels. Winograd argues that both parties would benefit from settling their claims against the other so they can minimize disruption to their personal and professional futures.

The Trump–Clifford Legal Conflict: Who Decides What?

Guest columnist Barry Winograd—an arbitrator and mediator, and lecturer at Berkeley Law—analyzes the settlement agreement purportedly between Donald Trump and Stephanie Clifford, an adult film actress also known as Stormy Daniels. In this first of a two-part series of columns, Winograd describes some of the intricacies of the agreement as well as the budding litigation over it, highlighting some of the strengths and weaknesses in the legal arguments of each side.