proposal and in that case the court ruled in fact the second district ruled that it was not a limitation and instead could be presented in the gypsy case the defendant was allowed to present evidence as to the plaintiff's dental hygiene care sewer connection to highland park storm sewer system those allegations survived and those allegations were the central of the patients in the case extensive discovery was done out of the shins extensive discovery was done on the nine hundred ninety four project in the city's rol that they were not connected the problems at the seven home stop immediately following reconnection it's also interesting to know that this is that it's had two different got a systems the go system in the front of the house was tied in to highland park sewer system the gutter system in the back of the house splashed into the yard there's a nice head no water infiltration issues at the back of the home all the issues focused on the from the home where the gutter system was connected to the highland park s which i wrote to the court are covered by the construction step to propose i think it's clear the case law discusses it's not a classification it can't be just a contractor just an architect just an engineer i constructive except honorable and except with limited witnesses i didn't do any discovery on the issue as to what would cost to die testing what the manpower would cost i didn't identify over the expert that could testify that this is what  within the control of highland park my client can't ask you mean the street to determine whether or not they're connected now the fact that they had fourteen years of water infiltration their home should have suggested a problem yes but they contacted a plumber after plumber after of the only two witnesses the defendant presented how reliable regarding the issue of cost benefit analysis and quite frankly if your honour's reviewed her testimony it was sparse she couldn't identify what the cost would be how expensive it would admissions with respect to the construction statute of repose are still alive and well also with respect to this this whole argument that the whether or not the construction statute of rep applies first of all clearly in that person's summary judgment order the circuit court found that it did that i would point out our as well here the please do not appeal from that order granting partial summary judgment on the  certainly here on the issue of notice actual and constructive has been in this case since the very beginning of the plaintiff has meetings throughout the day or sitting city is a passive landowner that means that they have to don't make street home did not have any water filtration it was discovered it had been made by a contractor at all but they did not experience water filtration at that house as a result of the lack of connection there were they knew there was a prior to nine hundred eighty four they claim that they have new problems before ninety four and right after going before the problems start they never contacted the city the city was never noticed there was  for fourteen year or had never had those problems before the suprising act as a homeowner practically speaking it seems to me that you would contact here is the power to you to find out if perhaps this new project had anything to do with your your water problems by waiting did ask themselves out of the statute of limitations and the statute of republicans so they do have relief they would have had relief had the time we complained to the city or somehow testifies that the disconnection occurred on city property not on my client's property which i think there's there's a great area there they renew their motion for leave to file for the defense again after the case in chief has been any of my witnesses could say on this particular issue i would have had to thirteen effigy problems about disclosures of whether or not this was disclosed i had a whole host of issues in obstacles that i would have had to overcome now could be done more certainly i could plumbers they called roofers they called in may and called contractors they did things for fourteen years to try to diagnose the problem unsuccessfully what could the city had done well a they do a lot of the nine hundred ninety four project and they could have done more to ensure that every house which we connected be they knew about the nine hundred ninety nine mission and they could have done something after that they could have tested all lines to see if everyone was connected there were only fifty three homes impacted by the project and they had started at