they give rise to the settlement fund occur on the property of the appellant the claimant the martha g again holes in the state one hundred thousand gallons of gasoline suddenly appear in the middle of their corn and soybean fields despite the fact that the property of the dam house in the state was at the epicenter of this bill the award made by the settlement administrator to the state from that fund was only one hundred twenty thousand four hundred eighty had one hundred percent of the pipelines feel of her own and were faced with this sort of result because the settlement administrator and then the trial court did not determine the damages to the dam housing estate based on an individual basis as is required by a political wall even though this is a class action proceeding class counsel would have you believe that this is just part of the way it works in a class action lawsuit everyone's damages have to be computer nick orton's with some sort of members whose homes are in the area of contamination must be decided class member by class member and not in accordance with some sort of script formula the same thing with obviously be true for the case that here in fact in this case was in federal court in new york as part of the m t v litigation the federal court in remaining it back to the circuit court of can't give you county explicitly found that their individual claim handling procedure in any kind of individual special circumstances that there would be for example when people got there on the settlement agreement they were able to see that on the website when they got claim form it told them right in the claim form that most of the residents in the core area have similar claims they will be compensated equally from the farm song as special circumstances or out of pocket expenses that would justify additional compensation if you believe the claim form you have s any harm that is materially different than any of the other as it is in the core area please attach a statement and any documents explain your situation that's precisely what the denounce in the state did we attach to our cl obviously that very clearly would go over easily that kind of valley some potential members of the class had a right to rely on this in deciding whether they should out on or not most as to the and housing estate there is if they were to be if they had something special of their values were different if the spill happened on their land then they need different trees the settlement in the street are represented in this report as you look in your materials there that he looked at the unique characteristics of the parcels of real estate he said he looked at the highest and best use of those parcels of real estate he said he looked at the highest cash value of those pieces of real estate he said he looked at special circumstances that would justify his full compensation he said he looked at one of the claim would have unique and obviously there was a huge to munition in value this property right around here is still we have forty acres has been the spill site for some twenty years now under remediation intensive all kinds of equipment everything else there he also pointed out that the this bill area cuts off the back part of the farm going all wrong even for farming it's not easy to do he pointed out all of those special circumstances all in the appraisal as he was going through this based on that individualized analyse look at every piece of the man ho nuisance and quiet enjoyment with our property based on this formula to produce ignoring what's going on in the whole situation so we he did not look at the individualized things that he needed to look at and analyzing our claim if we had special circumstances can't be treated you can't tell me that four cans of one percent compensates this claimant adequately on all this feel half of their property when we have probably being compensated in the same formula three miles value of one million so one hundred seventy two thousand three hundred dollars we are asking also for interference with quiet enjoyment three times that amount is a measure of that kind of compensation which is three million five hundred sixteen thousand nine hundred him there was no request from him he didn't give our claim form and say hey i see you got this in here or where you got here you don't like anything there was none of this back and forth on this it was just here's your war so and so we didn't have that you know furnish that number the so in this crater should not mean any difference to our claim number one and secondly the whole formula didn't say you get whatever you get is reduced by whatever you previously received from shell there are other people that had water systems put in the subdivision there the didn't hear the reverse the decisions of the trial work in the settlement administrator in a word for these elements of damage one million one hundred seventy two thousand three hundred four probably damage based upon the evidence of the appraisal three million five hundred sixteen thousand nine hundred dollars for interference with quite enjoyment in nuisance value and then the other things as part of the work to do the normal things that are really not nice future like bottled water in the things that are not to do she's received respectfully ask that you enter in order of cour and on the third page of the twenty form documents were requests supporting documents if they felt that there were special circumstances about their particular property they were to provide a settlement initiated with the form of various documents it was their burden to present the claim in support of op with documents and in this particular case the record will show that the van houses even got several extensions of time to complete their maturity and to provide the some of the new structure what did they give the settlement administrators in this case what they gave me and even minor their claims over four million dollars they gave him a report from the real estate probably was real property and it was being rented which only gets you but there was no mel you owe in the they look at that as having no value even though the value can be calculated by the return rate knowing the rental return was important for determining the value of the rental truck also as the court pointed out there was never any subdivision attempt to be planted out or in the series of are made to develop the property that was with the trout at the point give the sun in the street but they didn't give this a good ministry for supporting documents about the income they were receiving from shell and there was never disputed that they were getting some income but there was just never disclose the cylinder ministers the that they gave him he asked both the attorney for it and i was in the attorney for show about payments that show was making but the amount was not disclosed as of course did you have to go it was it kind of rules to argue that the property was was useless and worthless when she always paying thousands of dollars to read the court the trial judge noted that property that generates income on the snow is not worthless  administrators show that they suffered something so far differently from the other neighbors all the planes there was corps and there was our own but all of the planes in the cor suffered a nuisance and also they had a joint drama on the market value of the real estate oh and that was again in a defined area and with which we do with regard to nuisance with the trucks for example both  figures so under these circumstances under the circumstances of council wants to argue manifest within the ovens can you really say that the fact finder system administrator and the trial judge were unreasonable  years are not the typical fact finders that you might find with the industrial commission case or you have not lawyers even at the commission level and down below as arbitrators we had a son one minister here was a  not necessarily innocent simply between the man house and oh and corn in the settlement in ministry because you also have approximately fourteen hundred claimants and certainly whatever oh he's gone here with planes impacts on the rest of the people to come in and ask for a substantial portion of the settlement fine certainly impacts on their interests also they argue for example that the settlement agreement that there were no guidelines for compensation for nuisance and your friends with a cry of quiet enjoyment yet when they had the opportunity to object they did not they said that if they opted in they accepted benefits but now they are in here attacking so to speak the the way it was here singling our initial claims for special treatment from our point of view would be part from the equitable nature of the proceedings again if they want a special treatment i think the situation to do that is not to come into a class action and prove the student with distributions but to do it on your own oh they also  due to require that the trial work in that settlement newsreader follow the law and follow what they agreed to do when people signed into this class action lawsuit in the first place which is to consider those claims an individualized basis is for that two degree you can i mean it is stupid the situation is the one you have that kind of a side of the spill is obviously going to have more impact it would have been twenty years trying to clean it up for one thing there's nobody there not a mediating anybody else's land by the way there there actually nobody procedural thing that's been addressed by the abuse of discretion standard here we need to look at the the manifest way of the evidence then you're really you look at the case of the the trial court's order was that we follow the