wanted us to address the issue of jurisdiction so i thought i'd spend a minute talking about that now and the note from the clerk didn't indicate exactly what about jurisdiction but i'm assuming or it concerns about whether you  mentions that they had the same day they filed a motion for summary judgment with in the sanguine county was the day that they learned that barbara and kelly had passed away however after that  effort made by them to either point us move representative or amend their plan to name the estate i think you have to do name to get the special representative name first so when the matter proceeded on the summary judgment motion before a judge  deceased but there is a procedure by which they can bring her around at that point had we appealed from that original summary judgment decision or order of judge matsch we i think we docket order as to why he denied it ya some additional time passed then we then tried even our natural and normal course of things it's our responsibility to get a special representative agree with that the judge met and akkad in open court that he felt all matters had been determined as to all heard nothing left for the court to rule on meaning he didn't feel that  guess now the question is if the fornace concern that we're still not properly here because there was never any decision as to barberin jolly there was never any thrill for a finding that the matter was part of the whatever additional rights she may have under the policy of which she is the the policy owner we're going to end up back here on the same issue which is whether judgments of original summary judgment decision order relative to that was correct or not meaning is is the policy is clear cut this plaintiff would have a spell leave or were the ladders of correspondence court doesn't add any questions as they say the arguments on the policy it will say let me add one thing as i was looking through this yesterday there are a couple of cases that i ran across that weren't cited in the briefs i don't know if you want me to mention those and i as we do what it would be pretty simple the right end of these policies if you want to one arbitration here's the form you need to fill out and you need to do it by the state here's the magical language and you need two years but there's like to begin by indicating with respect that i do not believe this court has jurisdiction to review this matter the record confirms that january nine of twenty fourteen state farm file its motion for summary judgment and in that motion it announced in a footnote on the first page of its motion that it had its representative had learned that our brain jelly at die back  twenty thirty or twenty forty pointer to squeeze me so she had died before the complaint for declaratory relief was filed in court saying county i will candidly acknowledge that i looked into whether or not i had an obligation to file a suggestion of death to do that i consulted section to dish one thousand eight b to the only kosar seizure and my reading of that  brought me to the conclusion that there was a major qualification that that are my fouling the suggestion to quote from that provision of our states code soup seizure provides that if a person against whom an action has been brought dies and the cause of action survives and is not otherwise art his or her personal representative should be substituted as a party when i then research the survival act in cases that target statute i didn't find any indication that an action for declaratory judgment was an action which survives an argument has been set forth in my opponent's brief that this is an action for breach of contract i disagree remedies for breach of contract or money damages and some were civil simply seeking an interpretation of declaration one party's rights under surance contract a in this case of the defendant mr in jelly he did not see reconsideration objection its ruling and more importantly there was apparently no concern on the part of barbara and jellies representatives in fact the record further confirms that counsel for mr lucas of temper twenty three twenty fourteen to file a motion under supreme court rule three zero four eight and that that motion was die tonight on february nin statutorily compliance notice of appeal in other words their notice of appeal would have been in consequence of the court's denial of the real work eighty five being generous here trying to be accommodating but they  the order of summary judgment that was man every twenty seven of twenty fourteen so what i want to emphasize to this court is that that was a final order february twenty seventh twenty four the defendants came before joe schmidt and argued for three or four eight writing if he had modified his original ruling that would have prepared a new thirty day period in which to file a notice of appeal instead they waited another ninety plus days and then sought a different form of relief and only after that was denied did they file their notice of appeal so again for all of these reasons and as i set forth the greater clarity of my notably there is no correspondence which contains the words request demand or arbitration that simply doesn't appear in any of the letters that passed the farm and counsel for the in jelly's at any time during that critical two year period between june two twenty channa june twentieth well what they made reference to is we're thinking about filing an under insured or uninsured motorist cla total of all communications between houses with the jellies state farm during the two year period i would also ask the court to know that it was not until state farm filed this complaint for declaratory judgment that all of these issues arose afresh in other words it was more than a year after the two year period under the policy had expired that there was any kind of reaction to this issue of whether or not arbitration had been properly sought now at that point it was too late this court in the parish decision the first district in the line decision and several other sr courts have ruled consistently that these two your limitation periods for benefits in fact the rhyme case i held up quote here fern insureds letter to commence the arbitration process it must satisfy the expressed terms of the limitations provision of the insurance contract and quote there was no mystery and certainly no ambiguity that was the opinion of schmidt that as to what it was that was required to vitiate a claim for uninsured motor benefits that the earthly policy provision is quoted in the complaint for declaratory judgment and motion for summary judgment and set forth in in the brief that i've submitted to this board and the pertinent clauses provide as follows again i'm quoting under the uninsured motor vehicle coverages any arbitration or suit against us the state farm will be borrowed unless commenced within two years after the date of the accident there is no right of action against a state farm until all the terms of this policy have been met and unless such action is commenced within two years after the date of the ex again i can't think of any contractual i sort of describe how one commences in arbitration i'm not sure it's as clear as counsel suggests i agree that to your limitation here is very clear policy all it says is upon the insured requesting arbitra as well as how to do it what kind of language when you use say we have to use the word arbitration we have used the word demand some of the policies and ryan i think it was kahlo actually add that you have to demand arbitration happened after name an arbitrator it this policy doesn't say that it says within forty five days of the request for arbitration each party shall select an arbitrator and those arbitrator shall select the third then it has another provision that says in the event no arbitrators are selected which means selecting an arbitrator is not mandatory there's  then you get pushed over and you go in front of the american arbitration association so these are this is a different policy one cases i'm counsel so all are two off cases following a claim for you i am have to go to  personal injury action which is done oftentimes you don't know whether they're going uninsured or underinsured you aren't going to know under insured you're not going to know until you resolve the case with one party or determine they have low limits that you're going to have a claim so the underlying case could go on for several years beyond the two years now the policy is though require that you request arbitration so you know i think the more common practice is even though you may not ultimately need to pursue an on insured claim you say well we request arbitration if the policy says you have to name an arbitrator and we name joe smith as our arbitrator and then contract between the parties the contract action clearly under the probate code survives so i don't think the court should have any concerns about that