will be arguing as the mattress where the evidence as addressed in our praise there's a number of medical issues that i will not be addressing in my argument because they're in the brief if need be i can argue i can address it but i'm going to focus my argument on accident and teaching and it is it is our position it is that there are two accidents and that is based on the medical had june twenty fifth why is it significant at least on our part because every medical report states doing three everyone there isn't any report that doesn't sit it did not the last report i'm saying that there are the that he he told them that he had heard his that he had hit her his back and that resolved that his condition resolve you get that he went back to work and he needed no treatment and there was no issues harras any problems at work he was he worked full duty from the time he told he told us the service manager up until when he started treating which was july twenty and ok there was no problem there was no said he told the claims adjuster oh i went back to our full doing oh i was taken i was i was going into the cars i was taken in for oil changes it was after he returned from florida after he'd gone to disney world he said that he told the plant adjuster and i said wait a minute you told the claims adjuster you were get in and out of cars you were good you were taken in and then from the oil changes and he said all way i was confused i was confused there was an objection by counsel and the the objection was all the rules stating means he went back to work that he had a second accident and after the second accident he continued to have pain that's that's that's what that's what the record shows the record shows he had that if there is a second hand on a second date this interference scenario but i'm only i can only deal with one day of accident and that's june twenty fifth and when i look at the records i can't find anything that says that so if you know just just just acute onset of pain problems now council does talk about satellites whose medical center pages one thirty two of the record through one thirty five of the record contain initial visit to the emergency room he complains of low  say anything about the standard walker which is merely that you have to show that the accident was a positive fact not be not the primary any cause and effect if you look at the facts and draw the same reasonable inferences that the sink argument need at the circuit court which was rejected the circuit court put forth a single page order there was an adequate basis in the records system to sustain the commission's decision that is the standard which by the way the commission not simply rubber stamping the arbitrator's decision specifically expanded on it saying he was credible based on the totality of the record he testified credibly he needed a scooter to get around because of his hip and low back when he was down in florida when he got back all this talk about full duty flight duty but a little to marginally went back to work he continued to work his job he provided the assistance of the chair which by the way is exactly what the it didn't excel or did it likely would happen sometime in the future unfortunately that legal arguments are rejected by the court and also by the supreme court so there's no doubt about that further the commission is well within their province to judge the credibility of witnesses is there an adequate basis for that absolutely it's not against the manifest way to do that it cannot be clearly said that it's manifest weigh the evidence and i don't even know why we're here today in all honesty with that i respectfully request that the lower court completely accurately every time yes and the commission has to resolve all that yet i want i could i would completely agree with you but that i bring with you there are still two days there still it's one of the two days june twenty fifth and june everything goes back to the thirtieth right in my saying that every report says that every report but it's and in just as a follow up to your honor you get if this court feels that it's june twenty fifth instead of june thirtieth which we disagree and still he's he he's kept i might do a chop he's got might be restrictions that were given to him of twenty five promising restriction he testified that he they give him like doing he was working like to me at no time was it taken away that he would get there's no there's nothing in the one that would allow any t t t benefits he quit now he didn't say quit he said i moved to oklahoma but there is no testimony that they asked for why today and they said no or they didn't and then when he came back to the doctor's report clearly says nothing's changed everything's identical you can work by doing nothing i mean that nothing is nothing changed from when he when he first saw dr freebird so he was like to me he was always like me the only time he wouldn't be like do is if he was going to be having surgery he didn't have the surgery he moved to oklahoma we don't i don't know what happened oklahoma i think i did ask him if he a treatment there and i think he said no because i don't think there's anything in the record so we w