Did the Court of Appeals err in finding the trial court did not abuse its discretion by enforcing settlements that were disputed by a party without holding an evidentiary hearing in order to determine the facts of the dispute, and, if so, did the trial court's failure to hold an evidentiary hearing deprive the party's Constitutional right to due process?

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Did the Court of Appeals err in finding the trial court did not abuse its discretion by enforcing settlements that were disputed by a party without holding an evidentiary hearing in order to determine the facts of the dispute, and, if so, did the trial court’s failure to hold an evidentiary hearing deprive the party's Constitutional right to due process? Did the Court of Appeals err in finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding that a Neutral imposing a monetary punishment upon a party for declining a settlement offer did not constitute coercion or duress entitling relief because the party “could have walked away at any time’, even if the physical act of “walking away” would have resulted in the party suffering financial damages? If the Court’s desire to reach a pre-trial settlement in order to lighten the caseload surpasses a party’s Constitutional right to a fair proceeding and due process, resulting in coerced settlements that were enforced by the Court, would this suggest that the Court mandated ADR program in itself is unconscionable and futile?