fifteen thousand dollars and then you turn to mr mr larson's testimony and his testimony was that he had agreed to pay back a portion of her national deposit and that initial deposit was fifteen thousand dollars and he had agreed to pay back up proximately five this so the fact that even if you take mr benedix testimony on her own it's own without any other evidence that right there says that there's not a definitive term there as far as what's going to be paid back  mr larson's testimony he can testify to that i do not believe she did your honor i believe what she testified to was consistent with mr larson that he had agreed to pay her back a portion of her deposit and then if you're going to be working with the business you're going to have to have some kind of interaction with an actual human being and that you have an interaction with that person that individual does not mean that that individual is a personally liable for any kind of judgment  legs basically there's too many questions in fact in order to grant either of our cross motions and so i yes i would agree that it would be merging to the trial be fine except for the problem is that that judgment that he won or it would have to be based on some kind of competent admins beforehand and some really big issue never got to a debate over the credibility of the witnesses because there was no evidence before him that witnesses that any documentary evidence while and at the same time they're all i mean if i can write a letter that says your honor i have an agreement with you that here's our agreement here's the terms and i'm going to come over to your house and i'm going to do landscaping and and european hundred thousand dollars to do it and the fact that i wrote a letter to you doesn't mean much because it doesn't signify that you and i had an agreement it is only signifies that i funds that he didn't observe corpore for maladies that was nothing if they're just ended up being a verdict against him personally and really the only thing that was brought up with regard to mr brock mr larson personally upset that we've appealed to us and the fact that we've appealed a judgment that wasn't in our favor does not in of itself warrant stations against us and the fact that there is not attorney's fees provision in the contract for her if she prevails or some statute that would enable her to have attorneys fees does not mean that you don't get to turn around and seek sanctions in order to compensate yourself for legal fees spent on out by prosecuting and defending report of the morning my name's patrick williams and i am interning for lois bennett all three of you have raised the same question with my opponent and that's the same question that existed from day one contract and i still haven't heard the answer i haven't heard it this morning how do you explain why a person claiming the breach of a contract when turned around in a re deals with the return of her deposit that's the force and am just as they are going to hear an appeal they are this this stuart notion that since she did rescind the contrary within three days way the appeal has been brought to you and that's something that we have raised in our our motion to strike as well as in our motion for sanctions we submit that there is absolutely no basis for this appeal to have when we went to trial no motion was made no argument was advanced to the at the trial when the judge or when the judgment or the only argument that was made was that the that the judgment was for more than ten thousand dollars  capacity as president of countywide and he didn't sign a contract as brian marston individually he signed in as a representative of county wide and there's that and there's no evidence to the contrary that he individually entered into a contract testify to that because if it was in my case that i have to wait and i did not make that decision i don't know why that litigation decision was made so i honestly can't answer that i agree with you that that could have that could have been a possibility does it negate again it just wouldn't have been had to have been based on speculation by the judge because even plaintiff couldn't testify how much was owed we would have to disregard the fact that there was no consideration for the judge would have to disregard that in order to reach his verdict and he also would have had to disregard the