Post-Litigation Mediation: Resolving Issues After Court

So, you’ve been through the whole court process. Maybe you won, maybe you lost, or maybe it was just a mess. But sometimes, even after the judge has made a decision, there are still loose ends. Things you didn’t quite settle, or new issues that popped up because of the ruling. That’s where post-litigation mediation comes in. Think of it as a second chance to sort things out, but in a more relaxed, less confrontational way than the courtroom.

Key Takeaways

Post-litigation mediation is a process that happens after a court case has concluded, aiming to resolve any remaining issues.
It’s different from mediation before a lawsuit because the legal battle has already happened, and the focus shifts to practical solutions.
A neutral mediator helps parties discuss unresolved matters, judgment enforcement, or modifications in a private setting.
Benefits include avoiding costly appeals, finding more workable solutions, and potentially saving relationships damaged by the court case.
While litigation might be necessary for precedent or in cases with huge power differences, post-litigation mediation offers a flexible alternative for many post-trial disputes.

Understanding Post-Litigation Mediation

Defining Post-Litigation Mediation

Post-litigation mediation is a process that happens after a lawsuit has already gone through some part of the legal system, or even after a final decision has been made. Think of it as a second chance to sort things out, but with a neutral helper. It’s not about re-arguing the case that the court already decided. Instead, it focuses on ironing out the details that might still be causing problems or figuring out how to make the court’s decision work in the real world. It’s a way to wrap things up more smoothly, often dealing with the practical side of things rather than just the legal points.

When Post-Litigation Mediation Occurs

This type of mediation can pop up at a few different points after legal action has started. It might happen after a trial but before a final judgment is entered, or even after a judgment has been issued. Sometimes, parties might agree to it while an appeal is pending, or when they need to modify an existing court order. It’s particularly useful when the court’s decision, while legally sound, doesn’t quite cover every practical aspect or when circumstances change after the ruling. It’s a flexible tool that can be brought in whenever parties see a benefit in a facilitated discussion to resolve lingering issues.

Key Objectives of Post-Litigation Mediation

The main goals here are pretty straightforward, even if the situation feels complicated. One big aim is to reduce the chances of appeals. If parties can agree on how to handle things, they might be less likely to challenge the court’s decision further. Another objective is to find practical solutions. Courts make legal rulings, but mediation can help parties figure out how those rulings actually play out in their lives or businesses. It also aims to settle any remaining disputes that the court didn’t, or couldn’t, fully address. Ultimately, it’s about achieving a more complete and workable resolution, moving beyond the courtroom battle to a more settled future.

Reduce the likelihood of appeals.
Achieve practical and workable resolutions.
Settle any outstanding issues not fully resolved by the court.
Facilitate smoother implementation of court orders.

Post-litigation mediation shifts the focus from who was right or wrong in the past to how the parties can best move forward together, or at least coexist, with a clear and agreed-upon path.

The Role of the Mediator Post-Litigation

Even after a court has made a decision, there can still be loose ends. That’s where a mediator steps in, not to re-argue the case, but to help sort out the practical stuff that comes next. Think of them as a guide for the final steps, making sure things move forward smoothly.

Facilitating Agreement on Unresolved Issues

Sometimes, the court’s decision doesn’t cover every single detail, or maybe new issues pop up once the judgment is handed down. A mediator can help the parties talk through these remaining points. They create a space where people can discuss what wasn’t fully settled, like how exactly a payment will be made or who is responsible for specific tasks moving forward. The goal here is to find common ground on these lingering questions, preventing them from becoming another source of conflict.

Clarifying the practical application of court orders.
Identifying and addressing any unforeseen issues.
Helping parties agree on the ‘how’ and ‘when’ of compliance.

Guiding Discussions on Judgment Enforcement or Modification

Once a judgment is in place, the next hurdle is often making sure it’s actually followed. This can get complicated. A mediator can help parties discuss how the judgment will be enforced, or if circumstances have changed significantly, how it might be modified. This isn’t about challenging the court’s decision, but about working out the logistics. For example, if a payment schedule is proving impossible, a mediator can help the parties negotiate a revised, workable plan that both can agree to, which can then be presented to the court.

Mediators help parties bridge the gap between a legal decision and its real-world implementation, focusing on achievable steps rather than re-litigating past disputes.

Navigating Practicalities Over Legal Arguments

In the post-litigation phase, the focus shifts from legal battles to practical outcomes. Mediators excel at guiding conversations away from rehashing legal points and towards finding workable solutions. They encourage parties to think about what’s realistic and sustainable in their day-to-day lives or business operations. This might involve discussing timelines, resource allocation, or communication protocols needed to implement the court’s decision effectively. The mediator’s skill lies in keeping the discussion grounded and forward-looking.

Benefits of Post-Litigation Mediation

Even after a court has made a decision, there are still good reasons to consider mediation. It’s not just about closing the book on a case; it’s about doing it in a way that makes the most sense for everyone involved.

Reducing the Likelihood of Appeals

Sometimes, after a trial, one party feels the outcome wasn’t fair or that there were mistakes made. This can lead to the costly and time-consuming process of an appeal. Post-litigation mediation offers a chance to address these lingering concerns before they escalate. By bringing the parties back to the table, a mediator can help explore the specific issues that might lead to an appeal. Often, the underlying problem isn’t a fundamental legal error, but a practical misunderstanding or an unmet need that the court’s judgment didn’t fully address.

Cost Savings: Appeals are expensive, involving significant legal fees and court costs. Mediation is typically far less costly.
Time Efficiency: Appeals can drag on for months or even years. Mediation can provide a much quicker resolution.
Certainty: While an appeal’s outcome is uncertain, a mediated agreement provides a definitive end to the dispute.

Mediation can act as a final check, ensuring that all parties feel their core concerns have been heard and addressed, thereby reducing the motivation to pursue a lengthy and uncertain appeal process.

Achieving More Practical Resolutions

Court judgments are based on legal principles and evidence presented. While legally sound, they might not always account for the day-to-day realities or the specific needs of the parties involved. Post-litigation mediation allows for a more flexible approach. The focus shifts from strict legal arguments to finding workable solutions that fit the parties’ actual circumstances.

Tailored Solutions: Parties can agree on terms that a judge might not have the authority to order, such as specific payment schedules, non-monetary exchanges, or future business arrangements.
Focus on Implementation: Mediation can help iron out the details of how a judgment will be carried out, especially if it involves ongoing obligations or complex asset division.
Creative Problem-Solving: Mediators can help parties brainstorm options that go beyond the binary win/lose of a court decision, leading to more innovative and satisfactory outcomes.

Preserving Relationships After Court Battles

Litigation is inherently adversarial and can leave deep rifts between parties. However, in many situations, these parties will have ongoing interactions, whether as business partners, co-parents, or neighbors. Post-litigation mediation provides a structured environment to repair or at least stabilize these relationships. The collaborative nature of mediation, guided by a neutral third party, can help parties communicate more constructively and find common ground, even after a contentious legal fight. This can be incredibly important for long-term well-being and future interactions.

Comparing Post-Litigation Mediation to Other Stages

Post-Litigation vs. Pre-Litigation Mediation

Think of pre-litigation mediation as trying to fix a leaky faucet before it floods the kitchen. It happens before any formal legal papers are filed. The main goal here is usually to avoid the whole court process altogether. Parties might use it to sort out a business disagreement, a neighborly spat, or even family matters before they get messy and expensive. It’s all about keeping things amicable and cost-effective from the start.

Post-litigation mediation, on the other hand, is like dealing with the water damage after the flood. It occurs when a lawsuit is already underway, or even after a judgment has been made. The focus shifts. Instead of preventing a lawsuit, it’s about resolving issues that the court process hasn’t fully settled, or perhaps dealing with the fallout of a court decision. This could involve figuring out how to actually enforce a judgment, modifying an existing court order, or settling any lingering disputes that the trial didn’t quite wrap up. It’s often more about practical implementation and fine-tuning than about the initial legal arguments.

Post-Litigation Mediation vs. Ongoing Litigation

This comparison is pretty straightforward. Ongoing litigation is the main event in court – the back-and-forth arguments, the evidence gathering, the legal maneuvering. It’s a formal, often lengthy, and public process where a judge or jury ultimately decides the outcome. The core difference is control. In ongoing litigation, parties cede a significant amount of control over the outcome to the legal system.

Post-litigation mediation, however, is a chance to regain some of that control. Even when a case is already in the court system, mediation offers a private, confidential space to talk things through. It’s less about strict legal rules and more about finding practical solutions that work for the people involved. While litigation grinds on, mediation can offer a faster, more flexible path to resolution for specific issues that might be holding things up or causing further conflict. It’s a way to inject collaboration into an otherwise adversarial system.

Post-Litigation Mediation vs. Post-Trial Arbitration

This is where things get a bit more nuanced. Both happen after a trial or significant legal proceedings, but they serve different purposes.

Post-Litigation Mediation: As we’ve discussed, this is about facilitating agreement between parties. The mediator helps them talk and find their own solutions to outstanding issues. The outcome is voluntary and created by the parties themselves.
Post-Trial Arbitration: Arbitration, even after a trial, is still an adjudicative process. Instead of a judge, a private arbitrator (or panel) hears arguments and imposes a decision. This decision is usually binding, much like a court judgment, and has limited grounds for appeal. It’s essentially a private court system.

The key distinction lies in the nature of the outcome. Mediation aims for a mutually agreed-upon settlement, preserving party autonomy. Arbitration, even post-trial, results in a third-party decision-maker handing down a ruling. Parties might opt for post-trial arbitration if they want a definitive answer on a specific issue but wish to avoid the public record or the formal court system for that particular matter, while still wanting a binding resolution.

Key Considerations for Post-Litigation Mediation

So, you’ve been through the wringer of a lawsuit, and maybe a judgment has been handed down, or perhaps the dust is still settling on a verdict. Now, you’re looking at mediation as a way to sort out what’s left. It’s a smart move, but there are a few things to keep in mind to make sure it actually works for you.

The Importance of Voluntary Participation

This is a big one. Even if a judge suggests mediation, or if it’s part of a court order to attend mediation, the actual agreement reached has to be voluntary. You can’t be forced into a settlement you’re not comfortable with. Think of it this way: the court might make you show up to the party, but you don’t have to dance with anyone you don’t want to. True resolution comes from both sides genuinely wanting to find common ground. If one party is just going through the motions, it’s unlikely to lead to a lasting solution. It’s about finding a path forward that both parties can live with, not one that’s imposed.

Maintaining Confidentiality in Post-Trial Discussions

One of the major draws of mediation, even after a trial, is privacy. What’s said in mediation generally stays in mediation. This is super important because, let’s face it, after a court battle, emotions can be running high, and people might say things they later regret or that could be used against them if the discussions were public. Confidentiality allows for more open and honest talk about what’s really bothering people or what practical solutions might work. It’s a safe space to explore options without worrying about those words coming back to haunt you in future legal wrangling.

Ensuring Parties Are Prepared for Resolution

Showing up to mediation is one thing; being ready to actually resolve issues is another. This means coming to the table with a clear idea of what you need and what you’re willing to give. It’s not just about rehashing the legal arguments that led to the judgment. It’s about practicalities. Are you prepared to discuss how a judgment will be paid? Are you ready to talk about modifying an order based on new circumstances? Preparation involves understanding the current situation, identifying remaining sticking points, and being open to creative solutions that might not have been on the table during the trial. It’s about shifting the focus from winning or losing to finding a workable future.

Here’s a quick rundown of what preparation might look like:

Understand the Current Status: What has the court decided? What are the immediate implications?
Identify Remaining Issues: What specific problems still need solving (e.g., payment schedules, property division details, future communication protocols)?
Define Your Goals: What is your ideal outcome for these remaining issues? What is your realistic bottom line?
Consider the Other Party’s Perspective: What might they need or want? Understanding their position can help find common ground.
Gather Relevant Information: Have any documents or financial statements that might be needed for discussions readily available.

Common Scenarios for Post-Litigation Mediation

Even after a court has made a decision, there can still be loose ends or new issues that pop up. That’s where mediation can step in, offering a way to sort things out without going back to court. It’s about finding practical solutions when the legal battle is technically over, but the real-world implications are still being worked through.

Resolving Issues After a Judgment

Sometimes, a court judgment is issued, but the details of how it’s carried out can be complicated. Think about a property division in a divorce; the court might say assets are split 50/50, but figuring out exactly which assets go where, or how to value them, can lead to new disagreements. Post-litigation mediation can help parties hammer out these specifics. It’s not about re-arguing the case, but about agreeing on the practical steps to implement the court’s decision. This could involve:

Agreeing on a timeline for selling a jointly owned property.
Determining the fair market value of assets for buy-out purposes.
Setting up a payment schedule for a monetary judgment.

The goal here is to make the judgment actionable and avoid further legal wrangling.

Modifying Court Orders Post-Trial

Life changes, and sometimes court orders need to change with it. This is particularly common in family law cases. A custody arrangement that worked when children were young might not be suitable as they get older. Similarly, a support order might need adjustment due to a significant change in income for one of the parties. Post-litigation mediation provides a less adversarial forum to discuss these modifications. Instead of filing new motions and going through another court process, parties can work with a mediator to propose revised orders that reflect current circumstances. This is often more efficient and less emotionally taxing than returning to court.

Settling Remaining Disputes After Verdict

Even after a verdict is reached, there might be lingering issues that weren’t fully resolved or new disputes that arise from the verdict itself. For instance, in a business dispute, a jury might award damages, but the parties may still disagree on how certain contractual clauses should be interpreted in light of the verdict. Mediation can be used to clarify these points and reach a final, comprehensive settlement. It allows parties to address:

Specific terms of a settlement agreement that arise from the verdict.
Issues related to the enforcement or satisfaction of the judgment.
Any collateral matters that were not directly decided by the court but are impacted by the outcome.

Post-litigation mediation focuses on the practical application and consequences of legal decisions, aiming for workable solutions that parties can implement outside the courtroom.

This stage of mediation is often less about proving who was right or wrong, and more about figuring out how to move forward constructively after the legal process has run its course.

The Mediation Process After Legal Action

So, you’ve been through the wringer with a lawsuit, and maybe even a trial. Things are settled, or at least a judgment has been made, but there are still loose ends. This is where post-litigation mediation can step in. It’s not about re-arguing the case; it’s about figuring out the practical stuff that comes after the court has had its say.

Initiating Post-Litigation Mediation

Sometimes, the court itself might suggest mediation after a judgment, especially if there are lingering questions about how to implement the ruling. Other times, one or both parties realize that hashing out the remaining details face-to-face, with a neutral guide, is better than going back to court for every little thing. It’s a voluntary step, usually, meaning everyone involved has to agree to give it a shot. Think of it as a final tune-up to make sure the engine you’ve built (the judgment) actually runs smoothly.

Stages of Resolution in Post-Trial Settings

While the exact steps can vary, post-trial mediation often follows a familiar pattern, just with a different focus. It usually starts with an intake, where the mediator gets a feel for what’s left to sort out. Then comes preparation – making sure everyone knows what they want to achieve and has the necessary information. The actual mediation sessions might involve:

Opening Statements: A brief overview from each side about the remaining issues and their desired outcomes.
Issue Identification: Pinpointing the specific points of disagreement that still exist.
Exploration of Interests: Digging into why these issues matter to each party, beyond just their stated positions.
Option Generation: Brainstorming potential solutions that address these underlying interests.
Negotiation: Discussing and refining the proposed solutions.

It’s less about legal arguments and more about practical problem-solving. The mediator helps keep the conversation focused and constructive, especially when emotions might still be running high after the litigation.

Drafting and Finalizing Agreements

If mediation is successful, the next step is to put the agreement in writing. This isn’t just a handshake deal; it’s a formal document that outlines exactly what was agreed upon. The mediator often helps draft this, or attorneys can step in to ensure it’s legally sound and covers all the bases. This agreement can then be submitted to the court for approval, making it an official part of the court’s order, or it can stand as a private contract between the parties. The goal is to create a clear, actionable plan that resolves the remaining disputes and allows everyone to move forward.

When Litigation May Still Be Necessary

While post-litigation mediation is a powerful tool for resolving lingering issues, it’s not always the best path forward. Sometimes, the nature of the dispute or the desired outcome means that further legal action is unavoidable or even preferable. Understanding these situations helps parties make informed decisions about their next steps.

Situations Requiring Judicial Intervention

There are specific circumstances where a judge’s decision is simply required. This often happens when parties need a definitive legal ruling on a matter of law that mediation cannot provide. For instance, if a party is seeking an injunction to stop a specific action, or if the dispute involves a complex interpretation of a statute that could set a precedent, a court proceeding is usually necessary. Mediation focuses on finding common ground and mutually agreeable solutions, but it doesn’t have the authority to compel actions or make legally binding pronouncements on novel legal questions.

Cases Where Precedent is Essential

Sometimes, the goal isn’t just to resolve a single dispute but to establish a legal principle for future situations. This is particularly true in cases that might shape how similar issues are handled in the future. Litigation, with its public record and formal rulings, is the mechanism for creating legal precedent. If a party believes their case is significant enough to influence future legal interpretations or industry practices, they might pursue litigation even after a trial or judgment, rather than settling through mediation.

Addressing Significant Power Imbalances

Mediation works best when parties have a relatively equal ability to negotiate and make decisions. However, in situations with extreme power imbalances – for example, where one party has vastly more resources, information, or influence than the other – mediation might not lead to a fair outcome. A party in a significantly weaker position might feel pressured into an agreement they wouldn’t otherwise accept. In such cases, the legal system, with its rules and protections, might be a more appropriate venue to ensure fairness and prevent exploitation, even if it means more time and expense.

Unequal Access to Information: One party possesses critical data the other lacks.
Financial Disparity: One party can afford prolonged legal battles, while the other cannot.
Coercive Tactics: One party has a history of using intimidation or undue influence.

In these scenarios, the structured environment of the court, with its discovery rules and judicial oversight, may be the only way to level the playing field sufficiently for a just resolution.

The Mediator’s Toolkit in Post-Litigation Settings

Even after the main legal battle has concluded, there can still be lingering issues or new ones that pop up. This is where a mediator’s specific skills become really important. Think of the mediator as someone who has a special set of tools designed to help parties sort through what’s left, especially when emotions might still be running high from the court process.

Managing Emotions After Adversarial Proceedings

Litigation is, by its nature, adversarial. People often feel attacked, misunderstood, or even wronged. A mediator needs to be able to create a safe space for parties to express these feelings without the conversation devolving into another argument. This involves a lot of active listening and validation. The mediator might say things like, "I hear that you felt dismissed during the trial," or "It sounds like that outcome was very disappointing for you." The goal isn’t to agree with the emotion, but to acknowledge it, which can help lower defenses. This acknowledgment is often the first step toward finding common ground. Sometimes, private sessions, called caucuses, are really useful here. They give each person a chance to vent privately to the mediator, which can be cathartic and help them prepare to talk more constructively later.

Facilitating Creative Problem-Solving

When a case goes to trial, the outcome is usually limited to what the law allows. But after the judgment, parties might need to figure out practical details that the court didn’t, or couldn’t, fully address. This is where creativity comes in. A mediator can help parties brainstorm solutions that go beyond the strict legal rulings. For example, if a judgment involves property division, the parties might need to work out the logistics of who moves out when, or how to handle shared assets that weren’t explicitly divided. The mediator can ask questions like, "What would a practical solution look like for you?" or "Are there any non-monetary ways you could both feel satisfied with this arrangement?" This shifts the focus from who won or lost in court to how both parties can move forward in a workable way.

Ensuring Practical and Sustainable Agreements

Ultimately, the aim of post-litigation mediation is to reach an agreement that both parties can live with and actually follow. This means the solutions need to be realistic and sustainable. A mediator will help parties think through the consequences of their proposed agreements. They might ask, "How will this work in practice on a day-to-day basis?" or "What happens if circumstances change?" This reality-testing is important. It’s not just about getting a signature on a piece of paper; it’s about creating an outcome that resolves the remaining issues and prevents future disputes. The mediator also helps to clearly document the agreement, so there’s no confusion about what was decided. This clarity is key to making the resolution stick.

Integrating Mediation with Legal Counsel

The Role of Attorneys in Post-Litigation Mediation

Even after a court has made a decision, having legal counsel involved in mediation can be really helpful. Attorneys understand the legal landscape and can explain how a mediated agreement fits within the existing judgment or order. They’re not there to re-argue the case, but to make sure any new agreements are sound and practical.

Supporting Informed Decision-Making

Attorneys help their clients understand the implications of proposed solutions. Sometimes, after a trial, parties might be emotionally charged and not thinking clearly about the long-term effects of their decisions. A lawyer can provide that objective, legal perspective, ensuring that the choices made during mediation are well-considered and align with the client’s overall legal strategy and interests. They can also help identify potential pitfalls or unintended consequences of an agreement.

Formalizing Mediated Agreements Legally

One of the key roles attorneys play is in making sure the agreement reached in mediation is properly documented and legally binding. This often involves drafting or reviewing a settlement agreement, consent order, or modification of an existing order. They ensure the language is precise, covers all agreed-upon points, and is enforceable by the court if necessary. This step is vital for turning a mediated discussion into a concrete, actionable resolution.

Here’s a look at how attorneys contribute:

Clarifying Legal Ramifications: Explaining how a settlement impacts existing court orders or future legal standing.
Drafting and Reviewing Documents: Creating legally sound settlement agreements or consent orders.
Ensuring Compliance: Advising on how to meet the terms of the agreement and what happens if terms are not met.
Facilitating Court Approval: Assisting in submitting agreements to the court for ratification, if required.

While the mediator guides the conversation, attorneys provide the legal framework and assurance that the agreed-upon terms are robust and legally sound. Their involvement helps bridge the gap between the informal negotiation of mediation and the formal requirements of the court system, making the resolution process smoother and more reliable.

Moving Forward After the Courtroom

So, even though the main legal battle might be over, that doesn’t mean everything is settled. Sometimes, after a court case wraps up, there are still lingering details or new issues that pop up. That’s where mediation can really step in. It’s a way to sort out those remaining bits without having to go back to court, which can be a huge relief. Think of it as a second chance to find a practical solution that works for everyone involved, maybe focusing on how to actually make things happen rather than just who was right or wrong. It’s about getting things done and moving on, which is usually what people want in the end.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is post-litigation mediation?

Post-litigation mediation is like hitting the pause button after a court case has already started or even finished. It’s a way for people involved in a lawsuit to talk things out with a neutral helper, called a mediator, to sort out any issues that are still hanging around, even after a judge has made a decision or the trial has ended. Think of it as a chance to fix things up outside of the courtroom, focusing on practical solutions rather than just legal arguments.

When does post-litigation mediation usually happen?

This type of mediation can happen at different points after a lawsuit has begun. It might occur while the case is still going through the courts, perhaps after a trial but before a final judgment is made, or even after a judgment has been issued. It’s often used when parties realize there are still details to iron out, like how to actually follow the court’s order or if the order needs a slight adjustment.

Why would someone choose mediation after a court case?

People choose post-litigation mediation for several good reasons. It can help avoid the cost and stress of appeals, which are like trying to get a higher court to review the first decision. It also allows the parties to come up with solutions that make more sense for their specific situation, solutions a judge might not have considered. Plus, it can help mend relationships that were strained by the court battle, which is especially important if people have to keep interacting, like co-parents or business partners.

What’s the difference between mediation before and after a lawsuit?

Mediation before a lawsuit, called pre-litigation mediation, is all about trying to prevent a court case from even starting. It’s a way to solve problems early on, saving time and money. Post-litigation mediation, on the other hand, happens when a case is already in the court system or has gone through it. It’s more about dealing with the results of the lawsuit or resolving lingering issues that the court process didn’t fully address.

Can a mediator change a judge’s decision?

No, a mediator can’t change a judge’s decision. A mediator is a neutral helper who guides discussions, but they don’t have the power to make decisions or overrule a court. If parties agree to something different than what the judge ordered, the mediator helps them write that new agreement. But if they can’t agree, the judge’s original decision usually stands unless it’s appealed through the proper legal channels.

How does mediation after a trial work?

After a trial, if there are still disagreements about things like how to carry out the verdict, what happens next, or if there are minor issues left unresolved, parties can use mediation. The mediator helps them talk through these remaining points. The goal is to reach a practical agreement that everyone can live with, which might then be presented to the court to finalize.

What if one person doesn’t want to participate in post-litigation mediation?

Mediation works best when everyone involved agrees to try. If one person refuses to participate, mediation usually can’t happen. In some cases, a judge might order parties to attend mediation, but even then, they can’t be forced to agree. If someone won’t come, the parties might have to go back to court to resolve the remaining issues or consider other legal options.

Are the discussions in post-litigation mediation kept private?

Yes, generally, what’s said during mediation is private and confidential. This is a really important rule that helps people feel safe to speak openly and honestly without worrying that their words will be used against them later in court. The mediator makes sure everyone understands these rules before they start talking.