a an interim reports that went back and cover up world ears basically when we filed the objection the estate and the trustees moved to strike and ultimately after a number of  insulin and result was that trial judge said it was rescued a product and basically what the question here before the koreans was did we have to file something within thirty days of when that interim order occurred on april twenty or fifteen either appeal a move to reconsider it or object at that point or could we wait until the proposed file or it was submitted and then file and not only attack the reports for the period of time from april through october but all the way back for the entire period of the est thrust under your theory one of these cases ever good until they say it's no good and at this point especially because if there's been a statute in this course never spoken on the issue i think it would be prejudicial to say that we were supposed to that with first district and supreme court opinions on toy that we were supposed birol when they say we are supposed to file so my indication that our my argument is even if there was some type of were too too late so we do have allegations of mistake in how to we also have allegations of mistake types who bought seven specific transactions that we allowed in again those have to be taken as true accident we've alleged mistake or an accident so those counts have to come back and i've been in our view now in addition i guess as an alternative argument i want to make sure i have this clarify it was when i went back and l thousand and twelve the statute says you have to and is the trustee you when you will reports so he adding two and two together here there were no accounts for two thousand and twelve two thousand had three years from when the last accounting was done for that period and that wasn't that wasn't done until about january of two thousand and fifteen that would have meant we actually had sole two thousand and eighteen the time hasn't even run those of us hack add those points so cases where it's going like a denial of someone's flame and here we're saying that these are the granting of claims and you really have to wait until we get to see i don't think that's what it's for linda case as you shouldn't be having piecemeal final word is that this is only a rescue to connor case and if you're in the states and the exit is an exception and counts two and three should at least come back they haven't argued that i didn't know until kind of in their brief here and i think to me it seems too late for them to come in when we're at the stage and say well now the pleading doesn't you know of actual basis to it you know if that's where we get down to i'm going to please the court what i'd like to do is spend just brief comment or two on some of the factual basis that i think is that fully explained when i was really reading the briefs and so on and i realized gordon's gone through pleadings and so on in this situation right green executed a pour over will which left after one bequest of the tractor to his brother all of his farmland which was intense in common with his brother within weeks there was a voluntary partition between the two brothers and their trusts and deeds were one tractor was delivered pursuant to the terms of the will to the brother rule contest was filed by the brother of the doctrine of election not the brother out it came to this court on appeal truck after the appeal a will and trust contest was filed the second to the will and trust contest was filed the trustees recognized initially if in fact that trust was set aside as being due to undo influence or mental incapacity what would happen to all the real estate which was basically the sole asset in that trust you had exchange of deeds after the trust was executed you had billions into the trust that might be declared invalid so there was a citation to discover and recover assets so that was the first step where the trust and the probate estate which had the c d s and so on of the deceiving became pretty much involved the first was the will and trust contest itself the second disabled and on his death and twenty eleven the trustee said we're now at an all time high in real estate that we need to sell in case there is a dramatic decline in value and when they approached the court through a petition for sale and they held an auction sale pursuant to a court order on the report of sale when it was approved the judge said it in the court order approving it you will retain the proceeds of this auctions sale with one sat or two exceptions the expenses of sale and taxes attributable to the sale proceeds it was locked up by the probate court it was in court it wasn't being privately administered outside the courthouse by the trustees it was specific only within that  advance forward from about twenty eleven to twenty fifteen and there is finally from two thousand and six to twenty fifteen a joint motion filed in court to settle the will and trust contest and the trustees in the executive or say in our looking at the statutes twenty four dash to him and the trust and trustees act and saying how do we how do we bind all beneficiaries the probate access under twenty four dash two yes you can get by i mean if you give notice to the interested beneficiaries and even says if you've got a trust you don't have to give notice to the beneficiaries which give notice to the trustee that's in twenty four dash to it but if you give notice to all the trust beneficiaries then everybody who gets notice is bound so probate side the executor or files a curr the bennett income beneficiaries will say oh the disabled brother of the deceiving didn't die until twenty eleven and twenty twelve you have the first current account now the individual the attorney who or the other about going to cork it and it doesn't prohibit it so i told the trustee things prepare an accounting from two thousand and six all the way through two thousand and fifteen and they file it at the same time so you have a joint motion on the will and press contest settlement with that settlement being given notice to rather trust beneficiaries because their red cross are affected by the amount of assets in that along with two current accounts one from the executive order and one from the trust for all those are in the mail they've been proof of service it's set for a hearing april twenty four of twenty fifteen no objections were filed two separate orders were entered for that covered all the open questions of estate and trust as of that day through the accounting and through the sample for all that transpired subsequent to the able to twenty four wives on the twenty seventh of april those orders were mailed to all the trust beneficiaries and clued in mr brett was on the twenty ninth of april entry of the parents was filed by mr riddell i'm behalf of john brass nothing was done for the balance of those thirty days subsequent table twenty four in the way of a motion to reconsider or an appeal and i believe twenty four dash two says if you go through that procedure at least as to the probate or and you give notice that order is binding on everyone receiving the notice and i would argue that the same is true on the trust because of three o four b one which says if he has got a final word or in a state or a guardianship or similar proceeding on april twenty fourth the only thing that the final report did was it updated and provided an outline of all the different actions that were covered including reference to the attorneys that done since people twenty four in other words it was in effect a supplemental but it carry the normal probate paragraphs outlining all plans were paid all the personal property was distributed and so on it wasn't until ok in the final income tax return was filed with or the income tax return was file it was set for during september yeah filed in september in a minute or objections were filed for the first time by mr brass there was a motion to strike filed by the executive or and co trustees raising the issue of race judicata here is where we get into two six fifteen and two six nineteen two six a motion to dismiss and throw him out of court was a motion to strike under six nineteen it may be incorrectly referred to under six fifteen but the substance when you look at the rules it has to be under six nineteen and that's where we find every motion to strike if he and the mended motions are all raising the issue of race to the cop and because it's under six his theory of approving the accounting has to count and knock it out accounting one of them says ok there isn't a an entry in the accounting error there are three c d s listed and on the left side of the page the a c number is there and then you've got like  hundred fifty thousand dollars and sixty thousand and so on but in the right hand column where the dollars and cents far more than four hundred eleven thousand dollars and the free dollar amounts next to the the reason for that was the amounts in the left hand column were what the face amount of the cd was and it did not take into account accumulated or rooting interest these are alleged as discrepancies and he's saying that he found the amount afterwards were these are the same six i don't miss that we put in an affidavit which were raised by plaintiff's counsel in the will and other parties but they were never offered me a role the affidavit shows that three weeks before the april twenty fourth hearing it there was a response to those six items of discrepancy quote  final settlement resolving all the issues with it that's the way we approach it we're both filed on the same day the accounts were filed then the joint motion both were dressed an us know before hand and then we also in that letter said that in the event the court deems it appropriate they can continue it in light of objections something along  six nineteen when everybody thought it was to