This draft paper provides a broad overview of how jurisdictions around the world have attempted to address situations in which the same neutral serves as both the arbitrator and the mediator in the same dispute. It begins by surveying how the principal model laws and legislative precedents on mediation and arbitration regulate same neutral med-arb and arb-med, respectively. It then provides a descriptive account of the main regulatory approaches on the subject taken in national mediation and arbitration laws of 195 jurisdictions around the world. It concludes by eliciting broad regulatory patterns. The main finding is that many patterns, when broken down by region and legal tradition, are difficult to explain by reference to existing literature—for example, about the receptivity of Asian or civil law European countries toward same neutral hybrid processes.