head we filed suit you know you can see from the various motions that one had other multiple pleading issues of before finally they were doing motions for some judges as a result airport if my clients are b c had an obligation or a legal dude to send a notice of right to cure provide time to cure before fi and with p and c versus wilson it's clear that a procedural issue there is no distinction and a procedural issue is something that is terminated when the contract is and you don't need to take those act forth with then columbus container city terminations notice said this contract is over it's terminated julie filed suit claiming that there were things do you know in from before the rules you can't end our contract you can't proceed with foreclosure because you didn't send a notice of a face to face meeting and the court said no you never  that contract you abrogated the provisions you this thing is over and done with when you terminated and did not get or you did not reaffirm the contract and that is a procedural issue of procedural issue of you didn't send the procedural letter regardless of what would have happened because it was futile there was no point the contract was over carol versus her which you decided to out all of the stuff in the were reach of warranty several things one number one the airport could have pointed out with the word t must be read in conjunction with the rest of the agreement in other words you lose we just need to tell you why pretty harsh words but that's the way they've defended the case all the way through just like what was decided in carroll versus her but they didn't stop they said number two we could have discussed the rights and obligations of the conference including time and money on the samples so once again the same buzz off your wrong we're going to defend this nothing else would've happened it would have been a few times and i think those futility cases we have columbus the court was very clear to say hey wait a minute a notice of default is not a condition precedent to file suit that's why the judge threw so she said a notice of default was a condition of the president the final breach the right to cure then you can terminate the contract in the conference that they did so i would ask you in doing this to compare to the actual language and see the terms of the contract in what it says with regard to the various issues and clearly the contract does not say knows the right to british is something required sue it has a whole different section on owner abilities to sue which is under section thirteen after a moment would also point out of this talk about every provision of the contract must have meaning section thirteen deal the last sentence is very important any duty to give the airport notice under send norm a letter saying we believe your end of thought instead they say we never sent the notice goes we did all this other stuff to try to cure you to far is that i mean  accept that the cases say that holy executive or e obligations are not you can force something that hasn't occurred already but once they form the opinion of the airport was in breach of the then they had the duty to give this notice that happened before they were terminated in march because they were spending according to their allegations they were spending money and doing all these actions to try to cure the a and claimed one million eight hundred thousand dollars in damages that they incurred that was before the contract was terminated so they had a duty once they believe that the airport was in breach of their duty to provide written try to make that point in our greed but we view dacian is basically a unilateral statement we're not going to perform in this case we went through the stuff we did what we believe they should have done and that is with ninety days they weren't terminated now well over a year after the contract was in fact still have no evidence of financing and so they have done nothing to perform and they've never given us notice  the development had to be approved by the f a a will we still have the right to lease our property i don't know where they get the idea that we did but they certainly never advised us that they hadn't had devised this is that we could have discussed it with them and financing that they couldn't get the bits which really i don't see how you can turn around and say that it's the airports call that the developer couldn't get financing which which they agreed to do as a release package it's the same form but it does two different things one thing it does is to say hey we're just making sure that all of the things the f a a requires with regard to heights can overflow a flight  does not operate as a waiver of such defaults if we don't give such a nose in fact they were working diligently all wait until the time that the terminations became official to try to get these things done including  very very expensive process my plan is not willing to say i want to get out of this by doing a notice so that i can terminate the contract while i do then this is this is a great contraire i'm going to work with these people and try and get it clue that this was aeronautical property subject to the grant from the federal government that entire exhibit is you know it's thick and it's all presumptions of well if you d