Mediation and Arbitration, with Nathan B. Hoffman

0:02 As a real estate agent in California, on literally every single transaction, there is a box for mediation and arbitration. And we're all trained by brokers almost always to by default check yes. And explain to customers these alternatives are to protect them and protect us. What does it really mean? And then there's a whole 'nother world of mediation arbitration when you get into probate and trust administration. We're lucky today to have lucky to have here today man who's done hundreds of mediations I think and arbitrations as well. Attorney a local here in Southern California, Nathan Hoffman, attorney and mediator. Thank you for joining us again, Nathan.

0:37 Oh, hey. Good and thank you Bill for hosting me today. So, obviously there's a little bit of distinction between mediation. Let's talk about first mediation versus arbitration. Mediation in a real estate transaction, which I believe is mandatory or not I'm sorry, but if you check the box becomes mandatory as a means of resolving the process which is a step. Mediation in real estate transactions versus mediation in probate transactions. What's the difference there?

1:02 Well, the difference is it's honestly the difference is contract. So, CAR has a form that almost every real estate agent and broker use in a transaction. And uniformly in my experience that box is checked off. And what it does is it mandates that the parties go through a mediation and we'll talk about what mediation is versus arbitration. But go through a mediation if there's a dispute between the buyer and seller as a requirement if they later go into litigation and want to recover attorney's fees. So, if you don't participate in pre-litigation mediation and the box is checked off, you lose your right to recover attorney's fees in most circumstances. That's under the CAR form agreement.

1:52 So, just to clarify because I'm a little slow to repeat it. so I me sure I understand this. So, if it is checked, it doesn't mean they have to go to mediation before filing litigation. It means that they have to go to mediation before filing if part of their award or part of the damage they want is have their attorney's fees reimbursed.

2:12 You have to be an idiot not to go through the mediation, which in most circumstances is no cost to the parties, because CAR has mediators who will hear mediations without cost to the parties. Maybe you'll get it resolved. That's a great result if the parties can resolve it at that early stage. and they get their dispute finished and completed. but if they don't, they at least preserve their right if they go ahead and file ordinary civil litigation for whatever claims they have, breach of the agreement, failure to disclose, all of the various kinds of theories that can be explained. And they And the prevailing party in that litigation can then seek recovery of attorney's fees in their post-award, post-judgment proceeding in the court in with the court. Or even if they go later to binding arbitration, because what can happen and does happen in many circumstances is the parties will file a lawsuit. They'll realize that the lawsuit's going to take them years and lots of expense and trouble in the court. And then they agree to go to binding arbitration. Well, the arbitrator's going to be bound by the same rules and contracts that the parties entered into, and that arbitrator will have the ability as part of his or her award to consider the award of attorney's fees if they went through the pre-filing mediation process. So, in other words, if you're going to be in a dispute that that is subject to a CAR contract, do your pre-filing mediation.

3:44 It can always happen. Yeah, I feel like one of the one of the benefits here I will say full disclosure, I've I've hundreds of transactions as a CAR member, I've never once had litigation filed against me or had a need for mediation. I've been a witness in a couple matters that were mediated, but that's a different process. So, okay. So, that's mediation in a real estate transaction. And let's talk about arbitration, meaning imagine that either the mediation didn't work or they skipped that. What happens if they don't go to mandatory arbitration and they instead file litigation? Does there Do they have cause to do that? Are they allowed to do that? What's that look like? I know Again, I'm in a real estate transaction, not in a probate.

4:22 So, I'd have to look at any specific agreement to see what the parties agreed to. Typically, they don't agree to arbitration in the CAR agreements. It's an option, but I don't see that often.

4:35 Oh. So, look we should step back for a minute. The difference between mediation and arbitration, they're both defined in the in the California codes, in the evidence code and the California code of civil procedure. In a very simplistic explanation, mediation is a private meeting between the parties to see if they can resolve their issues with the help of someone who is experienced in helping parties resolve their disputes, the mediator. Arbitration is a substitute for formal litigation in the courtroom. And the parties can agree and stipulate to arbitration. and the difference is the arbitrator is actually hearing evidence and making a decision and an award. Wherein mediation, the mediator is not making any decisions, is not making any award, but is facilitating conversation and discussion between the parties to bring them to a voluntary agreement. So, there's a very significant difference between the two procedures, totally different outcomes.

5:44 Okay. Very different. Arbitration is formal, not quite as formal as being in a courtroom before a judge, but it's typically a lot faster. It typically is more economically appropriate. You are paying the arbitrator, you're not paying a judge, but it goes along typically much faster. You get it done faster. And once there's an award, that award can be turned into an enforceable judgment if that becomes necessary. Lot of words, but that's the main differences between those two procedures.

6:19 Well, as one of my mentors taught me early on, you know, you get paid for blah. You get paid for the words. So, those words are important. So, all that we talked about so far is the context of a standard maybe real estate transaction, maybe it's somewhat similar in the civil litigation. But now let's move to the probate side where, you know, my thinking always is, and I don't know that I know the answer legally, but from a business point of view, the last person we have a dispute with is a probate estate unless you have clear grounds because they're already in court. Like they're already in front of a judge. They already have a relationship perhaps with a judge. So, let's talk about when you have mediation. often times I find when there's litigation, there's arguments, objections to who gets how much on a on a probate. I seems to me there's a mandatory mediation meeting that the judge kind of forces. And there's different formats of that. But that's with the judge, I believe. The No, it's not with the judge. Okay. So, it's mediation. different formats and there's private mediators that that handle these cases?

7:17 So, California's unique, obviously, in lots of things that we do. Imagine that. Under the yeah, under the probate code and how it's been interpreted and case law where decisions have been made and published, in California, the probate judges, whether it's a probate case or a trust case, particularly, especially in trust cases, have the ability and the authority to order the parties to mediation. Mediation is not done by the court normally. It is done either by a free panel like in Los Angeles Superior Court. There are those of us who have volunteered our time at no cost to the parties to help mediate their matters. There are also private mediators. Myself included where we are hired by the parties to help mediate a case and there are mediation services companies that have panelists who the parties can agree to mediate their cases. So in Los Angeles and California, the probate judges, trust judges have the ability under the probate code and case law to order the parties to mediation. We get into an issue about who has to pay the mediator's fee if it's going to private mediation versus the free panel.

8:37 Typically if it involves a trust, the judge will issue an order that the trust initially pay for the cost of the mediation. Sometimes both parties, it depends uniquely on the case. And in California in 2021 things became particularly focused on mediation with the Breslin case, b r e s l i n, where the California courts confirmed the authority of the probate and trust judges to order people to mediation. And particularly there's a notice requirement so that parties get notice. And without going into the detail of that case, it's particularly significant because the judge can order the parties to mediation to give notice under the way in which the case requires that notice to be given to anybody who's interested. And then if the matter goes to mediation and the parties agree to a settlement which ultimately is approved by the court if there was a party that didn't attend the mediation and didn't participate even though they had the requisite statutory notice, they can be bound by that mediation agreement. So, it's become a huge tool and I will tell you in almost every case I've been in for years, probate and trust judges at the appropriate time will order the parties to mediation because they want the cases resolved. They don't want to have to make decisions. They don't want to have to have a trial.

10:08 There are occasions where cases go to trial. [snorts] But, the vast majority of the cases are settled by the parties either among themselves or by way of mediation. Very common at least in the courts that I'm used to being in which are Los Angeles, Ventura, and San Diego, Orange County.

10:27 Now, if parties agree to mediate before it gets to litigation, maybe there's a dispute and you know, before we file or maybe there's a filing and then one of the attorneys says, "Hey, let's let's see about getting a mediator, see if we can't resolve this off shore." does that then satisfy the judge? Is the judge still going to maybe require an additional mediation stage? Or well, you know, if both parties show up and both participate, they just can't agree to terms, does the judge then say, "Okay, well, you met that step. We're not going to slow you down now or penalize you for that. We're going to move your case forward."

10:58 Well, okay, so let's take your question step by step. There is no requirement that there be a filing in any California court for there to be a mediation. I probably handle 10 to 15% of trust and probate mediations that have not been filed in court. So, the parties have a dispute, they come to me, hire me as their mediator, we do a mediation. In every mediation that I handle, the parties will sign an enforceable mediation settlement agreement. So, the terms are very clear about what they are. There's no court required unless there ends up being a dispute, you know, afterwards, somebody can file a trust petition.

11:39 Sure. and then the other side's going to tell the court, "We already had a mediation. We already had an agreement. Judge, I want you to enforce it." You get into that battle. Now, once a case is filed, if there's no pre-filing mediation, you can the parties can go to mediation with or without a court order. That doesn't There's no requirement of a court order. But, in most circumstances, once a trust or probate matter is before the court and all of the proper paperwork has been filed and there's a dispute, it's a disputed matter, the courts, at least in our Southern California counties, are going to very likely order you to go to mediation, either to the free panel that the courts provide or to paid mediation. And the difference primarily is you get a lot more attention and a lot more time when you hire a mediator to help you through the process than if you use the panel. But, I did hundreds of the free panel ones and settled most of those cases. So, it's They're both equally important. They both end up at the same end. You sign an enforceable agreement and that becomes what the court's going to enforce.

12:50 I imagine in mediation that when parties get together, they may have, you know, multiple areas of disagreement, five or 10 points of contention. And while the mediation may not be completely solve all the issues, you can make progress if you get three of five or seven of 10 things resolved. Now, you've narrowed what the argument is and not only does that, I would imagine, reduce the cost and time of litigation, but perhaps later they'll settle on the other three items. They're more likely to. They've already settled on something. Is that kind of case or do you really need to kind of resolve the whole case with one settlement?

13:21 Well, as the mediator, I want to resolve the entire case. The point The point of the best point of the mediation is to take the parties who are far apart and work with them and come to an agreement and end their dispute. So, both sides are done. They know what their agreements are. Money gets distributed. Property gets distributed. Whatever the issues are, usually multiple issues, and be done. Alternatively, if you can't get the whole case resolved, yes, of course, Bill. You do want to bring the parties to whatever agreement they can reach. Now, I've certainly had circumstances, you don't like it, but you deal with it, where we've gone through a session, we've we resolved issues A, B, and E, but C and D and F don't get resolved. And then we set up maybe a second session or a later session once the parties do some more discovery if that becomes necessary or they just cool down and think about it or they go talk to a family member about it. I mean, there's lots of dynamics

14:24 Right. in probate that are different than just an ordinary civil real estate issue that are a little bit more complex typically.

14:33 It also seems to me I've I've seen enough cases where once the parties get together and agree on anything, they kind of come off of that. They let their guard down a little bit. They're they're you know, it's not as aggressive and then later they end up agreeing on a couple other matters. I've had it happen where Well, I thought we I thought you guys were still arguing over this. No, we decided this and that. We gave them this, they gave us that. And that was like months after the mediation agreement of the of the minor thing. So, imagine it's really about getting people just to communicate and to let down their guard a little bit.

15:03 Yeah, well, I follow up. So, if I have a mediation and we've got five issues and three of them get resolved and two don't. I'll let the parties cool off for a few days and then I'll call the lawyers and say, "Okay, look, we were this is where we were. Look, let's the three of us, four of us, five of us get together and talk a little bit about how we can manage these last two issues so we can get the whole thing done. And most often it works. I don't I don't let go. I want the cases to get settled and they get settled in 95% of the time usually. I've had very few cases that that don't ultimately resolve and I and I don't think that's atypical for good mediators who are really interested in trying to help out parties. Sometimes you need a little cooling off period. or sometimes a party doesn't understand an issue and needs an explanation by his or her lawyer. Or sometimes they have to do some research. They don't know the value of that particular item versus a different item. So whatever the circumstances are, a good mediator doesn't just come in and you know, okay, it's 4:30 and we're done. Sorry guys, goodbye. We can't do it.

16:14 Mhm. And this is really the difference between This is this is not going to sound good for my friend judges, but judge mediators tend to judge. Attorney mediators tend to mediate more.

16:30 I think you're right. But that's not true for all. There's some really good retired judge mediators by far. But judges are judges and they're used to hearing matters and making decisions. Where lawyer mediators, we don't make decisions. We facilitate the parties. And that's the point of mediation. To facilitate and work with the parties to come up with a plan that all sides can agree to and end their dispute economically and quickly and in a timely fashion. And make sure you have a writing that's signed by everybody so it's enforceable because under the California codes, a signed written mediation agreement can be enforced by the court if necessary.

17:10 I'm still not [unclear] but often try to get up to speed on what's happening on cases and often times I find it's you know, two different disagreements on fine points of the law. You know, this there's a there's an argument this one's more important than that and the other attorney is saying no, this one's more important than that one is. And you know, I look at that and say well, that's what we have judges for. They're judges to us to fill in the blanks maybe on the law or to help put some color to it or take the fact they're arguing over the facts of case and the judges has to see the evidence and make that decision. But sometimes I find that one attorney is telling their client the sky is red, the other one is telling their client the sky is blue. I just want to say to the attorney, the sky is blue. Why are you telling your client that it's red? And you know, I imagine as an attorney when you make that now that maybe a judge is the one who makes those more impactful. But I imagine you as attorney also can look at this and say to your colleague with the attorney, hey, the sky is blue. What are you doing here? And are there cases like that that are just that obvious where there's a fact that somebody's just insisting and arguing over and they just miss it and then you point out to them. What's that?

18:12 Well, so the dynamics of mediation are you put parties in different rooms, whether it's done in person or by Zoom. Doesn't really matter. They go into different rooms. And so you'll go into room number one and say tell me your story. Here's who I am as the mediator. Let's hear a little bit about you. You go into room two, you do the same thing with the other party or room three. And then at times you pull out people where I might have both lawyers together in a room with me and we're talking about an issue. And then I might have a time where I'm with lawyer one and lawyer two and then lawyer three. And you say to lawyer after you get into the process and you get into the issues you're talking about, okay, come on. I know that you want to make sure your client thinks that you're there strongly to argue and advocate on his or her part. But let's talk about why we're here. We're here to find a way to resolve the dispute. So you got to get off that point and let's kind of deal with it, massage it a little bit if you have to. Let me explain if necessary how these things can be looked at in different ways. And you do that and you go back and forth and you meet with parties and lawyers separately, pull them out, bring them in. Clients the individual parties sometimes don't understand when I'm meeting with the lawyers only and not with them. They get a little anxious. Why are the three of them talking, you know, or the four of them talking? And then I go back and I explain to the parties, "Look, you know, we weren't excluding you, but my job was to try to bring people together. I needed to kind of discuss some of these issues with the lawyers, get everybody to understand, even if we can't agree, to understand what the differences are. Now, put that aside and let's find out a way. And you know, nine times out of 10, these cases are about money.

19:58 You know, I want a million dollars and you only want to give me a hundred thousand dollars and I'm, you know, beneficiary number two. How am I going to get to my million versus the hundred? And so you talk about why, what issues are, and [snorts] move that along. And you know, ordinarily we get it done. It just takes time. It takes understanding. And frankly, in mediation, the parties for the very first time get to talk to somebody other than their own lawyer. Yes. their case. And so they hear things maybe that they haven't heard from the other side, maybe different perspective. They find out that there's maybe perhaps more than one way in which a judge, if a judge was going to hear this matter, how she might decide. So these are all many times new to people and we forget cuz we're in the courtroom all the time. The clients aren't, thankfully.

20:53 I also think I'm just kind of curious, just my observation, that sometimes the challenges are the attorney is maybe very experienced in one area of the law and not as much in the other. More commonly, might be a very experienced civil litigator, but not experienced in probate litigation specifically. And I know there's some differences in procedures and processes, certainly different judges, you're in different courtrooms for the most part. And I often find sometimes the probate attorney will you know, prevail because the civil attorney has something that's correct in civil court that doesn't really work that way in probate court. Now, you have extensive background in probate specifically. So, I imagine that bring that makes you much more suitable candidate for mediation in probate and trust matters.

21:34 Well, for the first 20 years of my practice, I was a civil litigator doing a lot of construction and real estate litigation. I know what that world's like. And then I flipped over and became a probate and trust litigator 2002 2003 I started basically. Huge difference. And probate lawyers and judges, especially when we're at a gathering

21:56 Mhm. not formally, we will joke about the fact that civil litigators don't know what they're doing in our courtrooms. Probate and trust is it's it's very different.

22:06 Right. and the rules are different, the attitudes of the judges are different. [snorts] But my role as a mediator, if I'm in that role, is to educate everybody who's there.

22:18 Mhm. And I don't you don't get anywhere by being demeaning or in any way destructive if you've got a civil litigator in a trust matter who maybe really doesn't understand the nuances and the rules of our case, doesn't know about Breslin, doesn't know about a lot of these things. You take the time to educate them a little bit, you know, hey look, this is you need to look at this case or this code section because it's directly relevant. And you don't do that in front of their client. You do not want to embarrass a lawyer in front of his or her client. Use the private conversations if they become necessary.

22:54 Right. But on a day-to-day basis in the courtrooms, yeah, we know who civil litigators are versus trust and probate litigators. And there are really good civil litigators. I can By no means am I you know, having any difficulty with those folks, but you know, if you put me in a federal courtroom and want me to argue a copyright case,

23:14 Right. I'm really not the right lawyer to do that. It's a different world. Yeah. I mean, I see that. I've seen, you know, really impressive-looking attorneys and sounding attorneys. They walk in really nice suits from very impressive firms. And the attorney we're talking about the probate notes and they're not talking about. And like the basic probate attorney knows about the probate notes and stuff. So, I would think that, you know, like most businesses, your success is a combination of the technical legal skills, knowledge, experience, knowing the law, and the soft skills, communication, being able to listen, being patient, letting people, you know, vent when even when they're acting inappropriately. So, you obviously have to balance that to some degree. And I know within the world of mediation, there are mediators who have lean on one or the other. There are mediators who really advocate their trial expertise, their, you know, legal knowledge expertise. And there are the ones that talk more about, you know, getting people together and finding solutions. So, on that spectrum, where do you find your practice? And where do you find your strength? And what do people you're looking for when they come to you that they're able to get?

24:22 The best mediators are those that have all those skills you just described. So, if you can find somebody who has extensive real trial experience, who's been in front of a courtroom, in front of a judge, or even a jury, even though we don't have juries, obviously, in probate and trust, but who understand those issues, and then either through experience or personality, learn to moderate and not advocate their position. So, as a mediator, you don't really want to advocate a position. You want to find the strengths and the weaknesses in cases and explain those to the parties. There are times, absolutely, where [clears throat] advocacy skills become important. When you have a client, a party, or a lawyer who is spending too much time arguing and not listening, sometimes a little forcefulness becomes appropriate. I don't like to be that way, but you've got to have the skill set to employ it when necessary. You know, the most important aspect of being a mediator, I think, is knowing the law, understanding it so that you can articulate it to the parties who don't have that experience, perhaps educate lawyers who may not have that experience, like you said. And then, you have to be empathetic. You've got to understand that emotions, particularly in trust and estate cases, there's a lot of emotion involved. You know, we joke around all the time. People ask me, "How do you describe trust and probate?" It's family law after death. All the same problems that people have in their family law disputes are involved in the probate and trust disputes, and it rolls over. So, you need to understand all of it and experience it.

26:06 And I think you have to be pliable enough to understand in some cases, your role is to really listen and explain to people and educate them. In some circumstances, you begin to nudge a little more and begin to say, "No, you're not looking at this correctly. Let me give you some reasons and explanations." And on very rare occasions, you might even employ, "Hey, look, I've been in the courtroom for a very long time. I know what the judge is going to do here, and you are not going to win on that argument." That usually comes much later in the day.

26:41 [laughter] You know, you start off meeting people, explaining to them who you are, where you are, and what you're about, and listening to them and who they are, and what they're about and hopefully you've got good lawyers who are there also who are not puffing their chest but rather looking out for the best interests of their clients to bring them the resolution and end their case and be done.

27:06 One of the things I know that drives clients crazy, unreasonably so, is that you know, we hire an attorney cuz we've been wronged and the other side has an attorney, we hate that attorney cuz we hate that person. We go to court and we either, you know, we win or we lose or we settle or we lose and we hate that but the attorneys shake hands and hey, let's go play golf next week and you're like what the you're like, hey, that guy just ripped me off for all this money. And yet, you know, one of the things that's interesting when you go to court regularly is you find that these that there's a certain collegiality amongst attorneys, there's a there's a kind of small community. And I imagine your business is coming from attorneys in many cases that you know, were on the other side of a matter and they came to respect and appreciate your knowledge and now they need a mediator or they're going to bring you in. So, how do you manage between the confrontation versus the relationships?

27:58 There's a huge difference between arbitration and mediation in terms of the disclosures that you have to make. As an arbitrator, there are very strict disclosures about your relationships and your history with other parties and other lawyers. In mediation, not so much. But I don't hide anything either. So, I let the parties know if I know the lawyers. I may not start off my initial hello, how are you? I know your lawyer and I hate the other side. I mean, that that never happens. But I will in the course of a mediation certainly explain who I know and I have to tell you, in almost every circumstance, the lawyers are all really good lawyers. They're different, obviously. Some I know better than others, but the same thing is true when I go to mediation on behalf of one of my clients. I know most of the mediators out there and they know me. They either know me because we were on the same side or opposite sides or both in litigation or because I've used them as a mediator. There's one retired judge who I have probably used more than 10 times as a mediator because he's very effective and he really does a great job in getting matters done and completed and I tell my client, I know this mediator really well. I knew him when he was on the bench. I've known him as a mediator and I trust him. That doesn't mean that you're going to get any special treatment because the mediator's role is still going to be the same. How can I understand the dispute?

29:30 How can I bring these parties together? How can I get them to sign a mediation settlement agreement so their dispute is over and done with which is the goal of any really good dedicated mediator. That's what you want to do. You were hired to help bring the case, the matter, the dispute to an end and you want to be able to do that ethically and in a way that the parties can agree to.

29:54 I feel like it'd be such a compliment if one of the attorneys knows you through trial and or mediation and the other one doesn't, what it means is the one who knows you presented you in a way that has to be truthful and honest and disclose otherwise it can't be he's a stranger. Oh, Nathan Hoffman has a good name. It'd have to be I've seen this guy before or I've worked with him before or I had a case with him or against him. You know, I think he's good or he's you know, two others are good and I imagine that the other side has to take that and be able to research you and say, okay, yeah, he seems like he'd be fair if they don't have any personal issue. How does that How does that get managed? The

30:29 There's a So, again, arbitration versus mediation are different. Arbitration has statutory requirements for the information that must be disclosed in advance of anybody agreeing and performing an arbitration. Mediation doesn't have the same strict requirements. You don't have to be a lawyer to be a mediator. You can be a non-lawyer mediator. You don't have to be licensed to be a mediator. I mean, look, if you go back to the history of mediation, which is thousands of years old, by the way, it was tribal leaders. It was religious leaders. It still is today. Many of our modern religions have procedures where you can go into your church or synagogue or temple or whatever it is, and somebody there will help you mediate a dispute if they want to. As long as And if As long as the written agreement is conforms with the law, that mediation agreement is just as binding as one that's done before a lawyer or a former judge.

31:28 Right. So, you know, you leave it to the mediator to decide how much he or she is going to disclose to all of the parties. typically, when I was the lawyer in a mediation, I'd always ask the mediator, "How do you know the other side? What's your relationship with the other side?" Just cuz I may not know you. So, I just want to know going in

31:49 Right. what And that And it And it does not, in my opinion, discourage me if I find out that that mediator has mediated eight or 10 cases with the lawyer on the other side because they were successful. Great. I know that this mediator has accomplished a mediated settlement with this other lawyer. So, it's kind of a heads-up. This other lawyer is one who will mediate and reach an agreement.

32:16 Right. The mediator, remember, the mediator can't force anything. Right. There's a mediation privilege in California, which means when that mediation ends, if it doesn't reach an agreement, nothing said or done during the mediation is admissible in any way or format in the courtroom. The judge simply doesn't want to hear it, can't hear it by statute. The only thing that that judge is going to hear is there's a signed mediation agreement. Otherwise, it's irrelevant in the pending case. So, I don't have a problem with the mediator knowing one or more of the lawyers. So what?

32:49 Got it. And I imagine this is also again, if they're bringing in the case to you, it's because they you maybe call you ahead of time and ask you some questions and they feel comfortable. And fact the other guy knew you and you did it at other mediations with him is a sign that you're effective with that other attorney. Gee, I found him to be difficult to work with. You were able to mediate with him many times. Good for you. Let's hire you. I can see Yeah, I never looked at it that way, but now that I see it's not that he got success necessarily at the expense of the other parties. It's that he got that attorney at least to the eventually agreed upon solution.

33:20 I have what we call pre-mediation conferences with the lawyers all the time. Mhm. Lawyer A will call me and say, "Are you available to mediate this case? Do you have any reasons, you know, here are the parties, here are the lawyers, is there any reason why you can't mediate?" No, I'm available. All right, let me now speak with the other lawyer on the other side who doesn't know me, who didn't pick me, who just has been told I'm available. I'll we'll talk. And I'll say, "Here's my background, here's my experience. If I know the other lawyer, I'll say, 'Yeah, we had a mediation 6 months ago and we got it resolved or not, whatever the case may be.' And then, you know, the reality is all the parties have to agree. If one or more say no, there isn't going to be a mediation in almost any circumstance because you want all the parties there. I mean, there's there's always a possibility that two out of three parties might want to reach an agreement between them without party number three. That can be done. It's very rare, but I guess it's possible theoretically.

34:20 Mhm. But I so as the mediator, I speak with all of the parties and give them my background, my experience. If they ask who I know, who I don't know, have I ever been in mediation with one of the parties or the lawyers before? I don't have anything to hide cuz I don't think it's relevant to whether or not I can mediate a case.

34:43 Well, look, I've gone a little over time here. It's a fascinating subject. Obviously, there's a lot more to go on in mediation both in real estate as a broker and in probate. And we probably didn't touch arbitration much. So, hopefully we'll get a future episode with you maybe going into details in arbitration. [unclear], thank you for your time today. We have Nathan Hoffman The Hoffman Law Group. I'm supposed to find There we go. There's the fancy banner we have there. thehoffmanlawfirm.com, thehoffmanlawfirm.com. And then down below is his contact information. Phone number [phone number shown on screen]. If you're listening can't write that down, reach out to me. Be more glad to make an introduction. Nathan, thank you so much for your time today. Appreciate so much learning about in general just the practice of law in probate and real estate, but more importantly on mediation. Thank you so much. Really appreciate it.

35:26 My pleasure. And if you want to get in depth on these subjects later, just let me know and we'll work on some special programming. I'm sure we will. Thank you. Thank you so much. If you're watching this is Probate Weekly. We get together every week and talk to you probate attorneys, litigators, administrators, vendors. In this case, kind of both. He does probate administration and trust administration law as well as mediation and arbitration. I thought it was really interesting. Hope you found that way. Let me know. You like it, didn't like it? Like this, subscribe. Send me a comment at Bill Gross Probate on social media. As always, make today your best day ever. Thank you so much.