David Suchar Hosts Latest Episode of American Bar Association's Podcast "Construction Law Today" Featuring Mediator Nancy Holtz

In the most recent “Construction Law Today” podcast, David Suchar hosts retired Judge Nancy Holtz, a seasoned JAMS mediator based in Boston. Judge Holtz shares her insights on the critical role timing plays in achieving successful outcomes in construction mediations.

Drawing from her extensive experience as a judge and mediator, she discusses the delicate balance of timing in terms of exchanging information, sharing key information about mediation participants ahead of time, and being willing to make bold moves as lawyers and party representatives in order to optimize settlement opportunities. Her practical advice and expertise offer valuable guidance for navigating the mediation process.

Listen to this episode below.

David began hosting the ABA’s “Construction Law Today” podcast in 2022. Additional podcast episodes can be found here.

INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT

Announcer
This is Construction Law Today, the podcast of the American Bar Association's Forum on Construction Law. Construction Law Today is a podcast about current topics in American construction law. Your host for Construction Law Today is David Suchar.

David Suchar
Our podcast, Construction Law Today, began in July 2019 and is now in its third season. In our first two seasons my good friend, Buzz Tarlow, produced 25 episodes on a variety of timely and interesting topics in the field of construction law. In our upcoming season, I expect to produce similar podcasts at the rate of about one new podcast per month. As always, we welcome your questions and comments. Please let us know what we can do to improve the podcast. The contact information for Construction Law Today is found at the end of this podcast. On behalf of the American Bar Association's Forum on Construction Law, thanks for listening.

Welcome to the podcast. Today we have a great guest, and that's Judge Nancy Holtz. Judge Holtz is a full-time neutral at JAMS. She is based in Boston, but she mediates cases throughout the United States. Before joining JAMS, Judge Holtz spent 15 years on the Superior Court in Massachusetts. While on that court, she sat predominantly in Boston presiding over civil cases, including construction cases. Judge Holtz is a member of the ABA Forum on Construction Law and has agreed to share her thoughts on mediating construction cases, specifically discussing the importance of timing and mediation.

Judge Holtz, welcome to the podcast.

Judge Nancy Holtz
Thank you so much, David, and thank you for those incredibly kind words and letting me join your podcast and have a little chat with your listeners. Since you mentioned the Forum, I did want to acknowledge that organization. I feel like in many ways I'm a born-again member of the Forum. When I had first started at JAMS about 10 years ago, I joined the Forum. And then I had a move from Boston to Dallas, back from Dallas to Boston and COVID hit and all that, and so I drifted away, but I have recently re-upped at the Forum and it's been terrific.

In some ways, I think I forgot how good it really is, the programming, meeting great people, like your listeners, great speakers. And in fact, I just came back from the meeting in Pittsburgh and I'm all ready to pack my bags for the midwinter meeting in Tampa. So I feel like I get a lot from the Forum, so I'm happy to have a chance to give back through something like this, this podcast, and hopefully provide some helpful advice and insights.

David Suchar
That's great to hear. I feel the same way and we're very happy to have you on the podcast. Turning to your background, it sounds like you handled a variety of cases while you were on the Superior Court, including construction cases. Can you tell us about your background?

Judge Nancy Holtz
Sure. I did handle a number of construction cases while I was on the bench for a few reasons. First of all, in Massachusetts we don't have a specialized session for construction cases so all judges in civil sessions sit on all kinds of cases, including construction. So sitting in a busy court, like Suffolk Superior Court in Boston, there were a lot of construction cases that made their way into my session.

When I say construction cases, I would also include the accompanying frequent insurance coverage dust-ups that we all know frequently go hand in hand with construction disputes. And also a lot of construction cases, we all know they start out with jury claims, but many times the parties through their attorneys decide a bench trial makes more sense, and so those cases gave me a real firsthand seat and tutorial in construction law.

I guess I'd say lastly is I did find, and I do find, construction cases extremely interesting and challenging, and so as a result I ended up getting specially assigned on more than one occasion, and flattered to say by request of counsel on both sides to preside over specially assigned complex construction cases.

David Suchar
Do you think that that perspective has helped you now as a construction mediator?

Judge Nancy Holtz
Oh, definitely. I think that because I learned construction law from the bench as basically from a neutral seat, I've come to mediate in construction cases now truly and solely from the perspective of a neutral. I don't come from a certain perspective, such as someone who maybe either currently or in their past mainly represented a certain stakeholder group, owners, design professionals, et cetera. So I think that this 100% neutral perspective is appreciated, quite frankly, by a lot of your listeners' clients. I know that parties in mediation can sometimes be wary, skeptical about whether a mediator comes to their case with an angle or a take because of their background or because they either do presently or have in the past represented a certain kind of stakeholder.

David Suchar
How did you first get into mediating?

Judge Nancy Holtz
I would say that overall when I left the bench I felt that I had the skill set that makes for a successful mediator. My judicial experience was a great jumping off spot because having been on the bench, you have to absorb and distill complex, dense factual and legal issues. You've got to be a good listener and you have to know how to ask probing questions.

But beyond that, what drew me to being a mediator was that I like people. I like to interact with the attorneys and their clients. I get a great deal of satisfaction in being able to connect, not just with the counseling room, but with the parties directly and chat with them and interact. And I love to see their satisfaction when I'm able to settle a case that they never thought they would get resolved.

David Suchar
How does it work at JAMS in that do you have a particular area of focus in your mediation practice or do you do a variety of different mediations?

Judge Nancy Holtz
I do a variety of different cases, but like many neutrals at JAMS, we have certain areas that we seem to gravitate towards or gravitate towards us. And so one of the areas of my focus at JAMS is construction cases. I'm part of the JAMS global engineering and construction group. Again, as I've mentioned, I find construction cases and those related insurance coverage issues to be really interesting, and they're challenging and really they're populated with incredibly talented, great attorneys like your listeners.

David Suchar
I've mediated with you I think a couple of times last year in Boston, but I thought to ask you some general questions about what we're going to talk about today. So as I understand it, you'd like to talk to us about the role of timing in mediations. Can you elaborate on what that means?

Judge Nancy Holtz
When I read articles, listen to podcasts, watch videos talking about best practices in mediation, what strikes me is that we all talk a lot about the mechanics of mediation. There are a lot of discussions on what moves to make when negotiating, how to engage in bracketing, how to use mediators' proposals. So again, there's a lot said about the what and the how regarding mediation, but I feel that there's one really important factor that is really overlooked and that is the when.

David Suchar
Timing, you're saying, is an important variable to you as a mediator.

Judge Nancy Holtz
I believe so. I think that being a good mediator, it sounds kind of funny, but it's a lot like being a good comedian. A sense of timing is crucial. The really great comedians, when you think about it, they don't just tell the joke. They know when to deliver that punchline. And I know I'm probably dating myself, but I would say think Johnny Carson. Similarly, in the same way that timing is crucial to delivering a successful punchline, so too a good mediator has to know when to strike, so to speak, in the room. For example, a good mediator has to know when to ask those pointed questions of a party about weaknesses in their position. You have to know the timing when it's right to urge either or both sides to make certain moves, and this is where I believe strong interpersonal skills are crucial. You need those skills, together with just good instincts, just to know when the time is right to make certain moves, say certain things in the mediation.

David Suchar
So timing is important for the mediator. Is it also important for the attorneys and the parties involved?

Judge Nancy Holtz
I think definitely, and I'm sure that you know, and I would say having mediated with you that I know that you know that timing is important. You can come into a mediation with some plan, some thoughts, some views, but you cannot approach a mediation in a formulaic manner. Too many attorneys, I believe they come to a mediation, they've got a rigid game plan mapped out, and they just refuse to appreciate that the mediation day, it's a dynamic fluid process and you have to sometimes look beyond your game plan and say, "Now the time to make a bold move," whether it's a decrease as a claimant or an increase as a respondent.

David Suchar
Might you give us some specific examples of how timing might affect the mediation?

Judge Nancy Holtz
Well, there are just a lot, but I can certainly touch on a few. But I would say just as a caveat, there's really no bright line rules here as to timing. A big part of timing, whether it's the mediator or counsel, it's just being able to read the room. I believe you need to learn how to pay attention and listen to what's being said, and quite frankly listening to what's not being said because a lot of times that speaks volumes about the other side's view of the case or where they're coming from. So those things are important skills to bring to a mediation.

David Suchar
I mediate cases a lot. I think that's probably the bread and butter of a lot of the lawyers in our audience. What types of information would you as a mediator like to see shared and when?

Judge Nancy Holtz
I like to have complete descriptions of the claims and defenses shared as much in advance as possible. I think that the sooner I have it, the sooner I can start to digest it and the other side as well. As far as the legal part of the shared information, unless you're really advancing a novel theory, I don't think that I'm looking for long string citations. And you can believe that the other side knows the law as well as you since the Construction Bar tends to be a highly knowledgeable group, so less is more when it comes to that part. But since I like to have pre-mediation calls with each side, it's really a lot more helpful and fruitful if I can get those materials first and review them before I have that conversation so we can have a really good talk.

David Suchar
I know you have the pre-mediation calls, and I think those are very helpful. Is there any specific information that you'd like to see the two sides sharing before they get into the room for the mediation?

Judge Nancy Holtz
Beyond the claims and defenses that, the bread and butter type discussion, in a perfect world, depending on the type of case, I would love to see an insurance coverage matrix so I can understand the interplay among the carriers. Sometimes I've come into mediations and I have to say I'm surprised when parties are asking really raw, basic questions about what the coverage picture is. And that's really something that should get ironed out, if at all possible, ahead of time. And for myself, I am not too proud to ask really dumb questions when I'm talking to someone such as yourself that you eat, sleep, and drink insurance coverage, and so it's a great opportunity for me if I can see what the insurance landscape looks like to be able to ask questions that help me when I end up in the mediation room down the road.

David Suchar
I found that process working with you to be very helpful, and also we talked about the different participants from each side in the mediation. Is that something that you commonly ask lawyers about?

Judge Nancy Holtz
Always ask lawyers about this. There are a lot of things that attorneys will share in a phone call that they are not going to reduce to writing. I think we've all had the situation where there's a conversation and an attorney might say to me, "Judge, just so you know, at some point I might need some help in my room," or attorneys might want to be candid and say, "The opposing counsel and I, we have gone hammer and tong, and we do not get along."

Conversely, sometimes I have heard attorneys, they will say to me, "My opposing counsel and I, we get along great, we work together all the time, but our clients just are spitting nails at each other," and so those are the types of things that are helpful. And quite frankly, I want to know who the players are in the room, who the power player is, because a lot of times it's not just the person when you get to the mediation day, it's not the person who talks the most and the loudest. That's not necessarily the person who is the real power in the room, so I can get that kind of information ahead of time and that helps me.

David Suchar
Those are things that often we as lawyers aren't going to talk about in front of our clients, so I think it is helpful to discuss those things with the mediator beforehand. What about when there is information shared on the mediation day, is timing important in terms of when mediation is shared once we get there?

Judge Nancy Holtz
This can sometimes be a tricky situation, and I think we've all been in a situation when on the mediation day one side or the other presents some significant new information and they haven't previously shared it with the other side. From a timing perspective, this can be really counterproductive because you always have to bear in mind that when a claim rep comes to the mediation, he or she has since written up an evaluation and they've sought authority back at the mothership and they've come to the mediation armed with a certain amount of authority.

And so if you spring something, a claimant springs something significant and helpful to you on the mediation day, there's really not a whole lot the claim rep can do with that information because had they known it ahead of time, that might have changed their view of what kind of authority they wanted to come with. So holding back potent information and dropping it on the other side on mediation day, it can be problematic.

David Suchar
You're not saying though that we need to share everything at the mediation, right? There's some information that it may be helpful to not share with the other party, I'm sure.

Judge Nancy Holtz
Absolutely. I think there are a lot of times when there's information that you might actively wish to withhold. And as a mediator, I talk to counsel whether or not to share certain information. That's the beauty of the confidentiality of mediation is many times I've had attorneys tell me something and they'll say, "Judge, this is just for you, but please do not share it with the other room," and they'll tell me something, and we'll discuss whether or not is this something we want to bring into the other room or not.

I usually encourage, generally speaking, full disclosure of all information, but certainly there are circumstances when the timing might not be right. And probably the best example I would give is if it's very clear that this case is going nowhere, it's never going to settle today, then I'll talk to the attorney and say, "Well, maybe the timing isn't right to share that little bombshell that you have." In other words, why would you want to telegraph your punch in advance of a trial or arbitration if the case is just never going to settle today anyway?

David Suchar
Judge Holtz, when we come back from the break, let's talk a bit more about the sharing of information and the timing of sharing that information in mediation.

David Suchar
Welcome back to the podcast. When we broke, Judge Holtz, we were talking about timing and mediations and when to give out certain information. Sometimes in mediations I've seen, and I'm sure you've seen this too, a party that hangs on to a position that I think everyone knows can't possibly be valid, yet there's a lot of time that's wasted on it. Is there a time when attorneys should revisit their positions and maybe concede a claim or a defense?

Judge Nancy Holtz
Absolutely, and I think you've hit on something. Holding on to a position just too rigidly for too long, it can be a problem. And you as the attorney, you need to know when to let go. And always be mindful that that's why you've come to mediation, that benefit of confidentiality. It's to make it risk-free. You can concede a point just for purposes of the confidential mediation just so you can move on and focus on your strong points and keep things moving.

In construction cases, counsel are generally willing to share their memos with the other side and at some version of their position. But let's face it, you each give the other one in mediation memos, they are buying into me, as well as the mediator, the mediation memos are by and large advocacy pieces, and it's rare that I see a candid discussion and exposition of not just the strengths of your case but also the weaknesses of the claim or the defense.

But when you're at the mediation, there usually comes a time for some level of candor with the mediator, and in fact with the other side, in order to get a case settled. I get it that it's in your DNA as attorneys to be advocates and to hold your position at all costs, but there comes a time when you need to move past or let go of a weak position in order to have a powerful discussion of the settlement value of the case focusing on your strong points, the case, the claims that do have merit.

David Suchar
And if you do make such a concession, what are the benefits to conceding a point during a mediation?

Judge Nancy Holtz
I think that a well-timed concession on a factual or a legal point, obviously just for purposes of the mediation day, it doesn't just avoid needless discussion of a needless issue if you're talking about how you are going to get punitive damages but no one really thinks that's going to happen. Get past it because it saves time, but also it's a really big credibility buy in the other room when I can go into the other room and say, "Look for today, we're not going to talk about this particular issue because I think that counsel knows that there's some real challenges there." It's confidential.

David Suchar
Can you give us an example?

Judge Nancy Holtz
Yeah, I can. Actually I recently mediated a construction case in which the plaintiff had three buckets of damages, and the last one was what I think could fairly be described as an iffy delayed damages claim. And the original demand included a pretty hefty number for those delayed damages, but there was no getting around it. It was absolutely the weakest part of the damages claim. And in that case, the plaintiff's attorney, I thought very wisely, he could see that it was dragging down the rest of his case for negotiation purposes and he abandoned it, so to speak, and said, "Let's just not talk about that today. Let's just focus on the first two areas," and it was a smart move.

If you have a weak claim, the other side's not going to put a lot of value on it anyway. They're not going to monetize it, so why waste your time? So should you bring all claims, even ones that you may feel are on the weaker side? Absolutely bring the claim, make the demand, sure, but you've got to know when it's time to let go because once you shed the weak component of your damages and it's pushed off to the side, now you can focus on the parts of your case that are powerful, that are strong, and that will help move towards a settlement.

David Suchar
That makes good sense. In terms of the negotiation process, we've just talked about conceding some information or a claim, what about the idea of bracketing? Many times either we or the other side propose a bracket during a mediation. Is there a good time to begin pursuing that route?

Judge Nancy Holtz
That's a tough one. There really is no hard and fast rule. Sometimes when there's a huge gulf, I mean that tends to be when to me brackets are at least worth putting on the table, there's a huge gulf between the parties positions, neither side wants to take the leap of faith and make a big enough move to get things going, and I find a proposed bracket can help kickstart things. Quite frankly, even when one side or the other says to me, if I propose a bracket, sometimes one side or the other might say, "Well, Judge, it's too early for a bracket," I find that even having the bracket conversation in either or both rooms, it can be of assistance to me in at least understanding the zip code of where you see the case settling.

But as always, this requires timing and a sense based on what you're seeing, what you're hearing in the room. I wish I could give you a magic formula like now's the time for a bracket, but it's just a sense that I think we all develop, your listeners as the attorneys, working with a trusted mediator that something has to give. Things are stalling out in the negotiation, maybe this is the time to talk brackets. And again, you've got to be mindful of that timing. For me as the mediator, I really want to urge either or both sides to toss this script out the window and say, "Now's the time. Let's do something different. Let's switch it up."

David Suchar
What about mediator's proposals? We see them being used a lot, often at the end of the mediation. Is there an optimal time for the mediator's proposal?

Judge Nancy Holtz
I think this is one that's not absolutely written in stone, but I think you referenced at the end, and I think that is the right time. It's when the parties are truly hitting an impasse. I think that if a mediator mis-times this and steps in too quickly with a suggestion, proposes a number, starts putting price tags on the case, he or she will be seen as being too evaluative. And even worse, the parties think, well, gee, she's leaning towards the other side.

So I think that attorneys need to be cautious in asking a mediator to weigh in. And I think that seasoned mediators know to move carefully before injecting themselves into that process. It really should be the last resort. To me, I mean a mediation, there's an arc to the day. If you get impatient, whether as the attorneys, the parties or the mediator and you interfere, you become third man in as a mediator, it can really mess up the negotiation and that's something that really should be held for the end of the mediation.

David Suchar
We've been talking about the numbers, which is the headline that people often want to talk about in mediations, but what about discussing the non-monetary terms, rework in the construction area, other things that can be done on a project that don't necessarily boil down to a price tag? When's a good time to start talking about those things?

Judge Nancy Holtz
I think that you rightly described the money part of a case as the headline, and that's true, but a lot of times there are non-monetary terms and many of them can be bread and butter things that are non-controversial, but sometimes there can be some non-monetary terms that are going to require some discussion. I like to get the terms on the table from the start so down the road if we start to get some momentum on the money talk, there's not some non-monetary term that derails things later.

But sometimes the party might suggest when I ask, "Okay, here's your demand or here's what you're putting on the table. Any non-monetary terms?" One side or the other might say, "Well, Judge, let's get to a number first, then we'll talk about the non-monetary terms later." The problem with that is that I might be hearing in the other room that there is a specific non-monetary term that's very much desired or a non-monetary term that is feared and it will be a real deal breaker. And so when that happens, I do need to discuss the timing of the non-monetary terms. One side wants to table it. The other side wants to tackle it. And when that happens, I need to find a way to firmly but diplomatically get the parties on the same track talking about non-monetary terms timing-wise.

David Suchar
How about the timing of the offers and demands themselves? How does timing affect making demands and offers and in what amounts as you go toward an ultimate hopeful settlement amount?

Judge Nancy Holtz
You've asked the most important question, and it's probably the most difficult to answer. It's really helpful for you, for counsel to work with a mediator that you trust because what I hear as the mediator when I go in and try to get one side or the other to do something, each side says to me, "Why should I make a big move when they're still so high? Why should I make a big reduction or an offer when they're still so low?" But there comes a time when working with the mediator, you simply have to decide it's time for you in your room to make the big move.

It's my intention to make sure that the parties don't negotiate themselves into the elevator prematurely by just refusing to move past an artificially high or low position. What I'm trying to do at a mediation to me working with the attorneys is provide an opportunity to settle. And that requires, again, people moving past their comfort zone and deciding I can't be looking at the other room and what they're doing. I need to focus. It's time for us to make a move.

David Suchar
How do you convey to both sides that the mediation day is the time for urgency, is the time to settle the case?

Judge Nancy Holtz
Sometimes I come right out and say it, quite frankly, to the parties in particular that there are a lot of studies and surveys done, but I think that, and the statistics are different, but I think that we pretty much all agree that most of the studies tell us that about 95% of civil cases never go to trial. So the fact is we know that it is more likely than not that the case that's being mediated will eventually settle, so why not today? So the mediation day is that opportunity, and I think that we, myself as the mediator and counsel on behalf of your clients, we owe them, that they need to be able to take advantage of this opportunity.

But if you approach bargaining in this formulaic way, forgetting about your goal, you're there to settle the case, if you get caught up on the artifice on who's done what moves, and I hear it in both rooms, "Well, they only move 10%. We moved 18%," or, "We moved X dollars and we're going to move lockstep." If you get yourself all tangled up in these artificial devices, you forget what the goal is. The goal is to create an opportunity for your client to have an alternative to the huge expenditure. And I'm not talking just dollars, but heat loss expenditure if you have to go forward into an arbitration or into a trial.

David Suchar
You must deal with a wide range of attorneys and parties in terms of their skill and experience and even stubbornness. Are some attorneys or parties simply bad at making the big moves even when they're necessary and even when they're called for in mediation?

Judge Nancy Holtz
Oh boy, absolutely. Some attorneys, and the clients, they just are absolutely incapable of making big, bold moves. They just want to spend the day just grinding it, so fearful of jeopardizing their position. But the fact is what moves you make and what you do isn't really going to alter the other side's view of the settlement value of the case anyway. And so what will change things is the timing. So sometimes you just have to decide now is the time because if you make a big move, that can affect the tempo, the momentum, and ultimately it will have an impact on whether or not you successfully seize that opportunity to settle a case.

So again, as I mentioned earlier, instead of calculating how much the other side moved versus how much your client moved, just consider whether it's time to move off your solely aspirational numbers, whether you're the claimant or the respondent, and move into a range that'll be a more combustible zone of settlement.

David Suchar
How do you get the more stubborn, recalcitrant party to recognize that the timing is right to seize the opportunity to settle?

Judge Nancy Holtz
It's a tough question, and like I've been saying, it really helps to work with a mediator that you like and that you trust. When either or both sides are refusing to move at all and they're just dug in, sometimes I'll be in one room or the other and I'll come right out and say, "Hey listen, if you have a big move in you, now would be a really good time to make it. And it's hard to do, and I know that I'm pushing you and your client past your comfort zone."

And this is where, like I've said, mediation, it's like comedy. You've got to deliver that punch line at the right time. You need to have the willingness and the confidence in yourself as the attorney to make the bold move. I can't tell you how many cases have settled when a claimant suddenly just makes a huge reduction or a respondent suddenly just puts a pretty big amount of money on the table. All of a sudden it just gets things going, and that's when the case moves into that combustible zone where a settlement usually becomes inevitable.

And I would just say lastly on that, you have to remember when I'm saying to you, "Gee, now's a good time for you to make a big move," bear in mind that I'm in the other room as well, so I may know something. I may know that if you were to make that big reduction or that big offer, the other side's ready. They're ready to reciprocate. It's my job as the mediator to help you with that timing, give you some advice.

But for me to help you, there needs to be transparency with me. Playing the mediator, holding me at bay won't get your case settled. And you almost have to remember my sense and when I'm urging you with regard to timing, like, "Geez, now's a good time to make a move," you always have to bear in mind that what I'm telling you it's informed not just by what you are saying to me in your room, but I'm hearing things in the other room as well that inform my view.

David Suchar
I ask guests this sometimes, and I'm going to ask you this question, what trends do you see, and maybe in discussions with other mediators that you work with, what trends are you seeing in terms of timing or expectations during mediations?

Judge Nancy Holtz
I'm not sure if I would call it a trend, but maybe I would think that what I see is that the counsel on behalf of their clients in these cases, they really want a level of evaluation. And even though mediation, it's voluntary and the mediator is not there to evaluate the case per se, I think we've moved past the days of mediators just being facilitative and just basically just bringing the positions of the parties back and forth and facilitating the discussion.

I feel that what the market wants now, including, and perhaps even especially in the construction world, is they do want a mediator to weigh in and not just bring in what the other side thinks or what you think, but rather, "What do you think, Judge? We're making this argument. We're making this defense. What do you think of that position?" And I think the trend seems to be attorneys fully expecting and wanting to see mediators being a little bit more muscular in how they discuss the case, the strengths and weaknesses of the case.

David Suchar
That sounds right. I think you're right that the role of the mediator is probably becoming more important in that way in terms of being more evaluative in addition to just shuttling demands and offers back and forth. You've given us a lot of good food for thought, Judge Holtz. Are there any takeaways or general advice you can give to us so we take advantage of the right timing at mediation?

Judge Nancy Holtz
I guess I would just end with something that's been limbed through this discussion. I know that you all come to mediations with your position staked out and you all have a game plan, but don't become a prisoner of that plan. You've got to be flexible and you've got to be bold. Work with the mediator, read the room, and just watch for the right time to make your move. Sometimes you need to toss out that game plan and you just got to make a game day decision.

David Suchar:
I speak from experience here, Judge Holtz, in saying that you are an excellent mediator and you've also been a great guest. Thank you so much for joining us on the podcast.

Judge Nancy Holtz
Thank you for having me. This has been a lot of fun. I love to talk about this stuff. And as I mentioned, I'm a big fan of The Forum as a resource, and this podcast is obviously a great way to keep the conversation going about best practices in mediating construction cases. So it was great being here and hopefully I'll get a call back.

David Suchar
Thank you again. That would be great. Thank you, Judge Holtz.

Announcer
You have been listening to Construction Law Today, the podcast of the American Bar Association's Forum on Construction Law. All rights relating to this podcast are owned and controlled by the American Bar Association. No reproduction or reuse of this podcast is permissible without the express written consent of the American Bar Association. For more information about Construction Law Today, or if you have any questions or comments, you may contact our host, David Suchar, at david.suchar@maslon.com. Our podcast is produced with the assistance of Peak Recording Studios in Bozeman, Montana. Thank you for listening and look for our next edition of Construction Law Today.