claim for tortious interference with prospective economic issues going to remain on that to the state court to be allowed to pursue with around the time that it made this tentative ruling there were several ex party contact mattered scheduling stuff it was vice very different ruling was going to come out clearly already been made it just isn't anything person and with knowledge of all the facts and we don't know all the facts we know with thanks that happened the conversations but the bankruptcy court specifically refused to allow me what he said he said there wasn't anything it was just gauge line nonsense well of course he said well i mean what you want to do depose the judge no but if we could talk to his is just that it's a ruling intended to assist counsel on understand in in in preparing for oral argument and if honing in on the issues that matter to the judge mind target ruling was to allow part of our claim to survive in the state court and we could pursue it tortious interference against accent on our top five after he made that tentative ruling there was an x party contact and then he came back and said i'm where he said i'm going to affirm my tentative i'm going to allow the state claim for tortious interference just survive it's going to be remanded the similar claim to have been brought in the trustees case he was just going to hold the day after plus he's seen what happened to the trustees case you get a bit tentative call the judge it's reversed it's a very tentative call the judge gets reversed you know i don't know  what i know what happened i don't know what he said to the judge i'd like to find out but i know this court and the district court don't know what they know what he says he sent to judge but we don't know what he said and the standard on recusal is with knowledge of all the facts and we don't have all things and we're not asking them to i think it's a counsel i forced my colleagues have been district court judges i have he was somehow bribed or coerced or something like that i certainly agree that it's improper except under unusual circumstances to have x party communications and perhaps this judge or his law clerk was not careful in that but there is nothing in this record that suggests that there's anything other than discussions about timing procedures there was no substantive discussion the judge said that so what what we have to do if we follow your line is basically going to have to depose the judge and can you imagine what that would do to our legal system if anybody didn't like the way a tentative ruling turned out and found out that somebody had made an x party contact a clerk could then depose the judge if they didn't like the ruling it would create chaos well right well you know what would happen not necessarily would be good for the system if you've got judge reversing ten of the wings i'm just positive motions twice after being contacted ex party by the losing party on those motions it would be a good thing to have those guards use the polls because i don't now the judge's order on page seven and it looked at sites all of the contacts all but two were with the clerk and just the very kind of thing a judge wright was talking about i  i mean i understand i counsel that you're concerned about you know what the how this may appear the reality is that any time somebody is on the side of a lawsuit that they don't like there's a conspiracy theory that comes around that somehow there is corruption involved right i think it's very bad for our legal system to have members of the bar suggesting unless they've got some solid proof that  the judges are somehow corrupted it's a very serious charge and from my perspective that's really what you're saying here that this judge somehow got bought off or something and changed the ruling by which that judge was previously bound as you heard telling us you know tennie rulings are not binding they are simply the for the convenience of the attorneys there is no evidence on this record of which i'm aware  there was corrupt action or corrupt communication by this judge perhaps the judge would be wise not to let his quote calved to so many expert in communications and the judge should be very careful as well to avoid this appearance issue implied both in the earlier case and in this case which is what i'm hearing you say as a judge is the real story here is we've got a corrupt judge and i for one resent it i think it's wrong i don't think a member of the bar the allegations of some trying to foster conspiracy to purchase these assets out of the bankruptcy for less than what they were worth there was no evidence of any agreement in any of the deposition