and a half across from the before the court closed on the day that the statutory redemption period expired it's obviously significant to consider the surrounding facts as just waiting to do something on the person's he basis with no really filing with no notice and no affidavit of service no explanation of an attempt little six point zero it is clear in terms of what it says the that petition or that emergency motion that why there's there's several issues that come into play when we look at that question number one if we're not around the scene arguing that each court is inherently has some equitable power in situations like this where the legislature has clearly indicated that the instrumentation is not to extend the redemption period provided by the statute we believe that their first and foremost talks about a situation where the individual got specific direction bad bugs from the clerk clearly the individual made the effort to reach out and speak to the people who would have knowledge or direct them to know if that person has access as clear a mandate from the legislature is there is it our situation where the legislature has said it is the principle we used to love this we will not allow this and longer the only example what if my client were to have made some representation to mr dover this or had done something to mislead him and thereby sent him off and a different path he couldn't get to the courthouse in time to redeem and therefore these are the tough choices but things come before the court in this case i think in a slightly clear package so that the court can make a determination that while we may instead be in her circumstances where there issued their permission in there that allow for vacating a tax deed when a tax or excuse me when a homeowner has not harper lee redeemed based on a sum error of a county clerk that have to worry ourselves that our i'm sorry and we do have to worry ourselves at that point with the march an ability of attacks why is it that before a march an ability of a taxi is even an issue that a court can exercise it the ability of the homeowner to do that otherwise why did they take it up at first blush here i would acknowledge that it could seem like that but if you look at the legislative history and you look at the overall changes that were made by that removal i passionately six months and if you look at the legislative history that surrounds those changes it's very clear that the legislature had grave concerns about homeowners losing their homes and lifetime investment provision but when they did it they made it more sweeping and more broad changes they extended the period of redemption by and editions six months and if you look at the legislative discussion about that they were concerned with home arguments to judge wheaton though it was after the fact they still had the opportunity to argue everything that they wanted to say to her and she saw it from her with her ruling saying i think i have the authority to do this and i think reason why this case should be the exception to the rule and obviously it would have to be exceptions to the rule well it appears in the right your honor there's nothing in the record supporting it and here or really discussing any type of compelling here other than one judge wheaton said after the fact which was my recollection is that he came in and said we have the money coming tomorrow she said i think under equitable circumstances i'm going to give him an extra us i argue in silence because of that silence because our related statutes to meaning twenty to forty five because of case law in because of the legislative history it doesn't prohibit it it doesn't allow it but i think if you look at the broader circumstances yes the court has equitable power to do what they did and i think in the first in this circumstance judge we made the determination yes i want to give this individual an  date he came in here were deemed the next day she relied on judge means ruling and i think to now go back and say to him that was a mistake you should've known better you shouldn't have relied on the trial court's order is go on the trial court he went in according to judge we did the right thing by coming to court and asking for an additional day he relied on the trial court hearing even the next day she did what he said he was going to do and to now say you shouldn't dominate the judge made a added after the fact speaks to i think what she would have done before all we can do is based what base our determination our speculations on what she would have done based on what she did determinations are not a part of the statute of property tax code by virtue of the statute itself in the language and so one second of all i'm sitting in i'm listening to counsel's argument and understanding first picture is i don't have the money i may have it tomorrow second picture is i don't have it all but i have most of it third picture is i had it but i had to use it for fill in the blank and you could come up with any number of scenarios which make it extremely difficult for a trial court in these kinds of circumstances and then i wonder to myself what will this court be address circumstances because if there's any game play if there's any reason equities should step in and not allow this to go to the final sales of the mortgage so that the property owners would lose their home to the mortgage company we want t that we really don't know the record unfortunately is better and i'm sure we don't know but we do know is that he was given bad advice by a judge i don't think faces the right word but he was told by a judge you have to think you're told by the clerk's office you have to tomorrow there's a legitimate opportunity for the situation for the court to exercise executive powers if a litigant is told by the judge incorrectly that they opportunity coming after the fact seep in goes to exactly the issue you were just talking about should we be able to say that the journalist knew the judge made a decision perhaps wrong and he relied  or you could have given notice that he could have said i'm going to be in this in this judge's chambers in an hour in a day i don't know when he knew he didn't have that money or that it wasn't going to be there and that moment we could