denied and my arguments are set forth within my brief they're very straightforward we argue that attorneys fees are mandatory for these type of actions the judge and the hour for for this case we had it broken out by the hour but you know if the if the court found it to be too high he could have reduced them not to deny and there's no real you've got statutory damages moderate but i guess my point is that there's no actual damages of mental anguish or undue harassment or any type of evidence it was it was a violation in terms of the how the credit company referenced itself she she did you all did not introduce any evidence of any type of mental anguish or harassment that she suffered it was more simply related to the moniker of the company that is correct  like that they were just too high he was well within his power just to reduce them but we felt like he abused his discretion by just arbitrarily benign it wasn't arbitrary he wrote a pretty long i mean both judges wrote opinions on the subject right yes ma'am they did write opinions and they basically felt that you'd trumped up you or your partner and trumped up the lawsuit and i don't understand that or care that your client didn't even reside in texas that she lived in shreveport with her boyfriend yes your honor i disagree with that respectfully she she actually did reside in texas she actually had a home or a room there are parents lived in texas with where she had her personal belongings and even received mail there i included that in the brief that she becomes apartment in shreveport and that's where the law office was where he was employed or she was just living with a boyfriend she's not even with anymore i mean i don't know why  i don't care what my point is that's where her employment is right five days a week i'm not for sure i don't think it was full time employment i'm not sure the actual day she was there but you know the difference the travel distance between the two is probably forty five minutes if i'm not mistaken on non expert only xeon of it i think is about forty five minute drive they didn't follow the suit in louisiana so i suppose you had reason file it in texas no other reason that we could she received an a t m t bill now this is just samples that she actually still kept i mean you know like i said milk it's the way we use samples that was just almost by accident that was still around but there was a it's not uncommon for a debt collector to sell things on and on about monthly but well i guess i agree with you on that but it wouldn't be the acquisition of a debt carry with it the debtors identity obviously the location all means of contact with the debtor and of course the amount that you do wouldn't that be information i've i'm just curious as to and by the way you have a meeting with the cause on august thirteenth of twenty fifteen the statement to be sent to the texas address as you are i just i'm i find it very curious that that's the order of events well if they were if they already had her address and that was in fact her home address seems to me a debt even want to quired by a third party would carry that information well i'll be honest with you on the for the written the main reason why i want you to be awesome less than i think the last case we had someone say i'll be honest with you and i guess maybe from my district court days and that always struck me as a big gratuitous we assume you're going to be honest with us and everything you say here yes your honor it's just us figures they just like stand up all of us but anyway she called to find out if they even still had its debt was several years old by this point and it wasn't even one hundred percent sure that they even still had it and she called to basically inquire about the debt and with other things that i've listed is just a sample she got most of her mouth at the hospital texas address maybe she didn't want her boyfriend to see her mail maybe and maybe they weren't going to break up well i mean another no longer together i just maybe there is reasons that he maybe is a guest when we say maybe this or maybe that we don't know and it's not in the record that there is a definitive reason one thing i do know is she did receive mail on a regular basis at the hospital texas address that is factual now why she wanted to sit there i can assume that she is because most if not i'm about all that most of her male actually went there this was not a one time occurrence where she said hey mil this one piece here for me please this is where she would go home she had a room with her personal belongings and she would stay there a couple nights a week and collect your mail and go back with me if this on a different note was there or not a demand sent by you or a co counsel a demand to the defendant saying oh by the way you should be advised that you are in violation by referring to yourself as credit here all of that language that you were successful on was there a demand made that they discontinue that practice or did we just go straight to court and say we win and now we're here for our fee proximately year every year and a half i don't have the dates there's the billups case and we we retail merchants association and credit bureau of the south i'm almost positive they were involved so they had previously geisha and it got it got dismissed because we didn't prove that they were actually trying to collect a debt so  got dismissed and we actually pilled it up to the fifth saying you know they're a debt collector using a bad name and the this circuit said that we didn't prove that they were actually trying to collect a debt it but my question is pacifically before this lawsuit was filed was there a letter sent or any type of notification sent that they should cease referring to themselves in this title yet you're saying that they must have known it because of it was mentioned when a separate issue was litigated previously in this case before we go to federal court file a complaint did we not send a letter stating citing the law here's what your practice is and we believe your practice you might be well advised to confer with counsel because if you don't we will then seek a legal remedy the answer is no your honor we did not see any kind of notice prior to this i would say however that we did litigate with them about a year and some change prior so they were definitely on notice that they should be using this name that we did not contact them for this case what about  judge payne statement indeed plaintiff's counsel admit in their motion then pay quote warned defendant to take the mediation seriously because the attorney's fee was going to be incredibly high if it couldn't get resolved close quote threatening two purpose at that was just come to mediation with some authority to where we can try to settle this a lot of times i've been in mediation myself where they come with almost no authority and we just like please take it seriously because this could get expensive fast the two hundred thousand dollars should have been used is probably in bad taste looking forward i won't that would be used again other than please take mediation serious but that was the whole purpose of the e mail it just kind of got some several months and in fact that was the call where she set this thing up she did call in and your partner was on the phone call well listening over actually he was not on the phone call your honor he was not listening and he was in the building i think he walked in the room once and walked back out but your honor he was not on the phone he was not listening that is a misstatement of misstatement of facts because that didn't happen he was in the building i believe it was even done in that you know i don't speak from a part of rebel leadership did it in the kitchen of office he walked in and walked out but he was not on the phone it was just really really  an issue but the idea of eight thousand dollars in travel fee and i mean you know the stills in marshall which is thirty miles from my house i mean you know right on the texas line eight thousand dollars in travel fees and billing at bournemouth fifty dollars an hour i mean this is just not that kind of case i just don't understand the cancian ability of presenting a bill that hard never mind your you know bell the district court could have reduced it this is hard for me to fathom how one would presume to be all that high for this kind of calling and expect just purely on a wording of a statute got you you know here it is just a net seemed to be what bothered the measured judge and the district court they recognize now out of case law on special circumstances but they were both struck that this will want if there ever was a special circumstances gaze this was it and so they flew upstream and did not it just because of the way this whole thing was presented so to me at least you got a child bird to persuade me of how i should reach the same conclusion frankly i suppose i live in shreveport dollars but it's kind of a lawsuit i don't don't get that sort of appointee is why isn't this a special circumstances case based on the face of it and findings below which only a thousand dollars in statutory law is is what's wanted well like i said there is case law that says attorneys fees are not proportionate and as far as four hundred fifty dollars an hour i actually just recently in the northern  district we had a hearing in a hearing on damages for a declaration case where they defaulted in that we had an oral hearing and i had to present the evidence and bring my client and discuss her mental anguish and at the end he wanted to address my attorney scenes and i and i had show me and i even with full disclosure and suntanned i was recently denied attorney's fees in the eastern district and that i have had four hundred fifty dollars for our role in debt collector it refers to that blood plan of reverse of that's illegal so she must have received some instructions as early as june two thousand and fifteen on aug thirteenth as you said the plaintiff's attorneys actually charge for time one point three five hours justification met with the client interviewed the issues involving her case that's in the record of appeal that twelfth of two there was no case on that date there was no case in existence two factual matters there claimed in the complaint one occurred august eighteenth two thousand and fifteen well the plaintiff it called the senate and asked that her bill be mailed or if you've read them under the federal under the fair debt collection practices act when a debtor requested validation of the debt the debt collector is required to mailed it to them and the debt collector credit bureau the self mailed her the validation of the bill one hundred seven attention is now required in order to clear this matter i didn't believe that was a demand letter i didn't believe that was an attempt to collect a debt it was just a cover on the bill the court found was attempt to collect a debt my client decided to pay the thousand dollars and go so we didn't appeal the issue but we really didn't think that was an attempt to collect the other incident september the twenty second two thousand and fifteen was a phone call placed by the plaintiff in her testimony in the presence of her attorney who she testified we asked her at the deposition who was that person you referring to at the end of the deposition of us mr ray so the only evidence in the record is that mr raeburn was there when she was making a phone call what opposing counsel stated that's not in the record and she was in louisiana he was in louisiana or look at the law office calling the defendant's receptionist in louisiana so no debt collection in texas but from the conversation in the transcript it's pretty clear what they were trying to  this concept of she's really a resident of texas i mean she has a louisiana driver's license showing she lives in the wheezy she her vehicles registered in louisiana show that this reston same address she's living at her twitter account shows that she lives in shreveport her linked in account showed she live in shreveport her google account showed she live in shreveport and she was a ploy by her attorney so how we state of texas why did they do that simply the term credit bureau is not defined in the federal fair debt collection practices it's not defined in the fear i thought the case would be at minimum transferred to the western district of louisiana i did follow a motion to transfer it didn't i didn't  it's not was not in the place for the magistrate but subsequent on this appeal i did some research and found and i knew this heritage because i'd gone to law school like everybody else but i didn't think about the simple fact that an attorney can't be an advocate and be a witness and that's when i discovered attorney should not even have been involved in this case because he a witness of fact i was my next question but i suppose we get into the expenses of filing motions to disqualify when in fact your exposure as you said was the thousand dollars to  be done with this notwithstanding the attorney has a lot of issues we could have done but one light doesn't as we stated he's a small family business and this is been a struggle for him to to do would admit this with everything that's gone that's gone on using the name credit bureaus not a wise decision he's no longer it's no longer part of the name expenses and he lives in shreveport i live in granbury texas and i practice and report all four districts in texas and in mississippi the two districts there he he practices in louisiana and i prohack you know on his ruge actually he lives in shreveport as well after and raban the raven law firm three zero one north main baton rouge so that used to be but that's not anymore ok so who's funk band lead the the lead law for he's in texas yet only to be noticed so who is it that was a colleague that i bring on if there's texas issues i don't do texas law so he came on board and for required but once and he came to the hearing we had some rejected hearing he was there and when we basically waived if we could get a ruling that day we as i argued we waived the texas side just so we can get a ruling that day because as the judge ruled there fact issues so that would have to go to the jury i said i'll talk to the client as if we can get a ruling today will waive this and so at that point you know if only the state side went away  but no you don't because you make your living off these cases well i do fair debt collection and i do credit reporting i'm exclusive to both and like i said your honor i'm after talking to rayburn i guess the majority of the travel expenses was me texas and then you get called on that in a hearing and you represent to magistrate payne that it was a quote mr choice of words i actually offered up here now you're saying she's a resident of forever parent but she votes in shreveport she heard her car is licensed in shreveport she works in shreveport i mean come gosh well how many sides of an issue can you take with a straight face there really isn't any side you're on or it's not there was no malice or even intent at all as matter of fact if anything else like she received her mail there and i just maybe i assumed you could have a myself been around a long time seen a whole lot of lawsuits and it looks like a gotcha on the statutory claim and then for there the rest of this with five lawyers all the hearings all this stuff about the locations and so forth it just didn't pass the test to be frank and so i get so sick of it just doesn't pass the test it really doesn't in terms of you know what's there but we've got the narrow issue of the attorney the vicious circle thing we've got all the record and we're going to get there but i hope you take away from the gratuitous comments there's something about the appearance of all this to just  hearing is that we felt like she got her mail there which she did stand but i guess all i'm telling you is in the complete information we've got we've got other footnotes and cites to other cases you've been involved in which has  disqualification and some other things you know track and again put into the mix or not here but they do make it wary in terms of looking straight on at the claims that are presented and that something to lay on your heart so to speak think about if you're going forward as you say you do a lot of federal live large federal court work you know we take a sort of a real strong not to look beneath you know these things so anyway