run when you're bringing it under section five hundred and eight c you must have a written agreement however the statute also permits you to bring it when you don't have a written agreement so so more nurse who don't enter into a written retainer agreement with their clients and also avoid providing them with client's rights and responsibilities disclosure right it it's it is an alternative running it's not a means of avoiding it it is which is not the intention of the parties it's their behaviors and agreement under the circumstances and then the or it then looks at the reasonableness of the feeds so under and that section five only includes all of the elements including grant or go forward and determine the reasonableness of refusal but you knew you didn't have a written agreement with the client that something fell between the cracks because that counsel said that you know i gave it to her and you know that she was going to send it back and i can't find one so you know error would only come if there's a written engagement agreement according to the language the very language of the statute will finally he allows for independent legal proceedings five already this is not an independent legal he filed in another question it would have to go to the chancery division because it's an equitable possibly action right it could be but it doesn't and that's and then some other charge who didn't preside over the marital dissolution proceedings would did come up and we argued that that we were bringing the position under on to maryland which was permissible under five away so we weren't asking the court to do anything on our behalf we asked the court to do that and recognize the authority under five a week to grant and determine or or you i am the attorney for the awfully in this matter another publish this matter comes before you on the denial of a motion for the court to set a statutory amount of attorney's fees for a law firm that just say nothing not return the the written agreement the written retainer agreement and then at the end of their process say i'll hear hear judge i don't think that's what's occurring in this particular case i think what the court is taking into consideration is mr hoffman her statement that i think i handed her a written agreement and a statement client's rights and i asked her to sign it and return it at that she had an opportunity to review it there has been no proof of any correspondences between the client and the attorney saying hey you know thank you for coming to my office and provided you with this information please return it and there's as there was testimony in that hearing by another that no i never received any of those documents i gave him a credit card he's like that he charged me a fee and i left the office which she also paid thirty thousand dollars leaving leaving sixty seven dollars unpaid correct and if you take into consideration just nations questions to opposing counsel about well you think it's fair that you represent somebody for a year you accrue ninety seven thousand dollars in expenses and then two business days before the trial you would drop and you leave that client to go to a trial talking about that the difference between a statutory right to attorney's fees and a common law right to attorneys fees i would agree popham bergen block has the ability to file a common law action and that common law action would be for breach of fee that would be something that a jury would determine what is a reasonable fee when you provide legal service to an individual you may not have done all the you were supposed to do for their client so without an attorney was given four boxes of documents if i p m on friday and was told that she had to go to trial on monday the decision that she received was not in the city when we were not here to argue the amount  or a written agreement there's just no one correct so and we're not going to rewrite the law here so it really doesn't make a difference what makes a difference is whether or not they are intended to file their action the way they did it or not and again  you know the common law action is the only appropriate way for them to move forward since there is no written agreement but they're saying that it the city the scenario where there is no written agreement so low some for quantum era and if by the way because of the other sections the other sections would say from my understanding once you don't satisfy the written agreement or send or cannot go further the other sections are when that client and the tourney has a written agreement and let's say a the nd possibility would be there is a written agreement that you did all this work and you're entitled to some piece no you bring up want to marrow claim by itself exactly right or the st is and how is the nd one limited to the situation where there is work might have been done or anything yes and just bring in some entirely new judge yes and in every case that was brought before a court the judge has no prior experience with this case you learn through the arguments oh it's all a through trial i think that you should not have knowledge when you are going to be better if that were right under this see your graph see by all hearings instead of mixed in with section two or section ten because again your honor the section t it may be poorly drafted but it still has the effect of covering everything else is in here under section c no matter what number and yes i believe so yes and without satisfying that st requirement you don't move and the to both parties for your arguments and briefs we will take the matter under advisement then the issue of decision and w