report to parents of the of the like only and that third one is really important because it's mentioned two times in their policies not only in seven one eighty eight which is the only thing in harassment but also in seven one did not happen so there was no how it was just like if i'm a principal and i investigate and i determine that in the child mind there were behaviors that she or he did not like and were difficult to deal with but were none the less part of school interactions and i determined that no bullying or harassment as those are me and occurred why would i take a remedial action or notify the parents of the i might take my remedial it remedial action by adjusting a class schedule but i would do that i might very well do that silently not to call the attention of the kids that might be bowing that done yes in response to a complaint because there's an old adage with kids in school if you report it and the kids that you who are allegedly bully you find out about it you get worse because nobody follows through and protect because you can't do that in the playground all is by way of seeing you if i were the principal and i cases even if he screws up and they're not doing the best might happen but so why because they've decided that for whatever reason this matter policy the policy makers we don't walk to have it or be any liability exercise and intentional discretion in saying i'm not going to but in our particular situation in our case the principal just ignored it she buried her head in the sand she did not investigate she did not ministry discipline and there was a requirement a duty for the principal to investing to it and it has just don't go beyond investigate because i want to break that down because that's who's to say these allegations warn investigated but to use that as a broad term i mean the fact that these were brought to the attention nice complaints were brought to the attention of williams and we were they dead proceeded to assess the situation for there was a certain amount of assessment that was done by cooper and by williams yes trying and i think there might have been minimal ok that complaints are being made against these are things that actually occurred here and that these assessments were done now yet at that point an assessment is made and the end of the result of the investigation has won i'm going to go to this next step well then isn't that a matter of discretion on the part of the superintendent or the the principal yes john i think that would i would but let me go back to your other question  so therefore i think that notification part is very critical any aggressive can you point to the board policy that identifies what is to be done in the way of investigation what is to be done in the way of discipline what's to be done in the way of reporting to parents can you just identified here for us where that comes from it doesn't say know obviously that's him for this example or an exaggerated example but there's a continuum and if he in the principle i mean if they've got it if they've got good staff they're going to rely on the classroom teacher policy decisions that were made by williams into her in this instance i recognize that the plaintiff in this case says that the district did nothing i would argue that that is a opinion and inclusion but in reality revisited all over again to get that case as you know the plaintiffs who disagreed with how the school district specifically the principal and the social worker dealt with poleon allegations this case is no difference in this instance cooper and williams took actions when confronted with foley allegations as outlined in our brief miscue originally pat with the mother in this case she followed up to talk to the teacher about it at the time and what exactly was going on in that classroom she felt based upon those interactions that that was the proper way to address the situation when the  satisfied there was a meeting had occurred with principal cooper and superintendent williams and other options were discussed such as the transfer of the child in this case and that was not  worst things to happen the transfer occur there were consequences for some of the students i mean i understand the point of disagrees with how the timeline but we're talking about a three month period i mean it was an evolution of decisions that were made to address this situation and again as the court mentioned earlier not every allegation that comes forward to principal cooper or superintendent williams is going to constitute bowling sometimes the allegations simply don't rise to that level and that was the first decision that they made here as to whether this that this was or was not boiling and also the kids at issue i mean the bowling policy at urbana of school district spans all the way from free today to adult education i want to say there's nine separate schools at urbana every situation is different every classroom is different in this instance these kids my understanding has been together for a period of time there were different issues that were going on there and based upon the situation that this cooper and mr williams were confronted where they felt that the way it was handled was the best way of handling it we did get through this with mr smith but i want to make sure that during your portion of argument you do it restless it has to  decision was the first decision that we pointed to and also the chicago fire case was another case where that was discussed and i understand at one point there are ways actually suffusion on the issue but we argue that the rise for  an exception to chew or one of the acts you know where it does not exist and we would say that based upon her on a chicago and rise all all together show that that would be an improper reading of the tort immunity acts that you all want by it's unambiguous terms provides for absolute immunity to public employees serving in a position where they determine policy and exercise discretion even if it is of use and there is no exception and that's what happens and here is public schools to which by the way parents are required to send to or perhaps submit their children to the better for so what's your recourse when they're when it does come up and the woman shows up in your office and wants the suit what do you say  just want to know what to do about right again i would suggest going to the complaint procedure i would think that in that instance that would address the situation but in circumstances where there isn't either a need or certainly could be instances you know where where where that could happen where the immunity would not be available but in this particular instance the immunity is available based on the fact pattern i think that i mean there are instances i mean ten and it's specifically is to create a situation for the regional board of education and the school districts issue to administratively transfer students who require an alternative education because of illinois legislature grants a public entity immunity and when that happens in a particular case as recognized by the core of the trial that will would not be appropriate for them to find a special duty in this instance  issue and that's essentially against we would argue that this case is very similar to our make in a situation where we believe the plaintiffs basically disagrees with how the situation was handled they believe that based upon how it was handled appropriately escalated the situation and that's exactly the allegation in our workers and the cases directly on point even though the point if disagrees with what the administrators did in this real any or all of the factual allegations still being near we do and we do it actually shows we don't admit the conclusions that we did nothing to the opinion that we did nothing i think she went to the teacher and tried to address it that they met with her again where were superintendent williams not involved in a meeting took place that curriculum was developed by the social worker to go in the classroom to try to resolve the situation but i guess the level i still think that within itself would be her making a discretionary policy decision and she might tell you now maybe there's things i could have done differently but that site usually monday morning quarterbacking after the fact clearly the late to the point that it did based upon the age of the students in the situation that sandra cooper was confronted with along with superintendent williams they felt that this was an appropriate response and again we're talking about a three month period this didn't just happen overnight i mean she spent a series of time trying to address the situation it within that classroom and i think also it's important to recognize the principal in each each  different school had has the discretion to implement a role in policy how they see fit and that is something sandra cooper had been doing since two thousand and seven she had a curriculum she had different boot camps that were taking place this was before the fall in policy was even passed at the district that this is something she was trying to impress and continuously tries to address within her specific elementary school and the elementary principals may do it differently and in fact you do it differently in the high school they do it differently in the middle school they do it differently but this is something that she was on a continual basis trying to address and i did in two thousand and eleven twelve school year specifically new things were done and that is outlined in her affidavit and however there is that phrase or that conditioning clause except as otherwise provided by statute which is not found anywhere in article four or and it's only found it's not not has not even common article three there's except as otherwise this act in article three the except as otherwise parted by statute is only found two locations and that's two two or one and two to all four and they're very similar  o i just want to clarify that they would regard the special duty how we still believe there was a special duty we believe and we've argued that in not in the groups of special duty was generated due to the special there was a description of what actions were taken in terms of response to the allegations of coke and did you dispute was already evidentiary material