that the c m i government did not object to the submission to the jury in accordance with rule fifty one with respect to that particular rule namely the covenant concept and maybe may have been in the beginning a contract concept in fact not made it was there's no question about that particularly with respect at will employment however certainly the state of california as well as other states have determinations she prevailed again the government still read used to reinstate her as per the government's only determination since civil servants were seven years into this program and if there is not such an implied covenant to deal fairly why should she have to go into court every single time from the severe court administrator pension system here we are  that was addressed during the rule that the motions and this is the problem the jury clearly came up with this book the five thousand dollars based upon the testimony a deuced the trial that this was the balance of the wages due the problem was in reading the jury verdict form even after three lawyers have gone over and they decided that well we wouldn't answer number four because that's we can't do that because we filed for the plaintiff we only answer  put it in another fox so that does go to the jury thought their way and what they were doing is awarding damages for the back wages is what you're saying not only did i know they didn't put it in clear the jury apparently did not and put it what they wanted to award a different place because they thought they were precluded from putting it into orbit for a number of problems to ask no questions qualified right that we're talking about i'm struggling with that while i don't in any way from down what mr camacho did in terms of you know she got her bladder you know she got a hearing that you know everything was false exactly find the person you know how was after these little events that are taken place with respect to the what i was told the bogus employment rating that were issued by mr camacho she had hearing later on about a year later and ultimately  process so i mean that they followed and you know there are things she didn't because they they didn't ever hearing for a one time and they terminated or without certain things and your position is obviously he went right by the hand bu now if they did it wait a year later right i mean there could be you know i did say doing something you know i mean there could be a time i factor in their lives actually i don't think that palin's performance the question was soley whether or not mr camacho had the authority to terminate her at all and bear in mind that he was the executive director of the governor's the developmental disabilities council and really whether or not  there actually was a statement during by counsel that those points were not properly submitted to the jury so the so that that right was preserved there was no waiver on the part of the commonwealth or selecting a jury and one at that time the government agreed ok i'll pay up to this point but after this point the point being the time of the offer we're not going to pay so after the trial and for a period of some months afterwards there were partial payments made upon the civil service situation