for that was hired yes your honor we have the case for example where they original attorney had the firm had dissolved and the idea the fact whether he worked for that firm and that time has no bearing on whether he had this room she isn't this firm involved here the zone this firm and not dissolved and no one had died but it just shows that that fact is not a relevant fact whether he was working whether he was paid independently  by a law firm doesn't mean he did not have a statutory lien claim in the proceedings against the defendants his relationship to mr canal's feet does not affect his statutory leave against the defendant so then your honor in other words he had an attorney client relationship which is clear from all the case law as soon as he appeared of record that attorney client relationship was never breached by either mr has or by the client mr ponsonby there was no motion to said well how could it be expenses licens and time was in there all right because your honor that does not keep you from being an attorney a lawyer still licensed in missouri which is a been a profound three hundred dollars fee or something to get back into health annoying he simply said that he was still responsible for this this matter because he had never filed it with drop it never had it the court of never found the some other attorney had been substituted for him so he had an obligation an ongoing obligation to this client even though his illinois license was not active at the time i sent the notice the bill or is clear it doesn't say after attorney's office he was active at the time he did all the work and the reason the statute is set up is to ensure that he gets compensated for the time he worked when he was licensed he's not claiming any of the money or anything for any work that he did not do he's claim the statutory lien based on the work he did when he with law firm only after the wrongful destruction mr hess mr has was the only one who was prosecuting this claim for the years as we set out in our brief there was no other tourney working other than m because the supreme court has ruled in philip morris that facts similar almost like an eclipse of the facts of this case that the trial lawyers there had established a attorneys lead in that manner the law is clear that under this statute mr has as an these services and as the law clearly says he shall have only the people of the state of illinois had no like separate attorney client relationship with the trial lawyers other than through the a g to get the supreme they served notice on the defense they would have an action against the defendants there might be a breach of contract action by canals against all those warriors if if they did indeed breach some sort of a contract with that house while he was working for them but if they filed a notice of leave against the defendants there's only one per would be put in escrow and then those attorneys fight over that amount of course any lawyer and bio notice of leave because it's against as the supreme court held in philip morris it's against the the procedures against the defendants the defendants are the ones that are liable to put that money up or to pay the attorney fees it wouldn't matter if one hundred attorneys filed a serve the defendant saying hey we're working on this case you have to respect lead each time they appear no you don't have to do it each time they've heard they only would have to do one but to notify the defendant that they're claiming a like in our case a third of the proceedings the defendants with that have to honor only one attorney they're not going to have to pay three or four different birds they're only going to pay one attorney fees if they don't put it in escrow and let the court work it out for the g eight the amount that he the pope had a share in the amount that each attorney is supposed to get within that f and i'm assuming that the lower court would look then to see what share the feed the mouse was supposed to get what share the feed the other lawyers supposed to get what you're the land was supposed to get and if there was a dozen lawyers that filed a notice of leave as in this in doubt that the case was placed in his hands and that he took action upon his suit and can file the suit and were put on the suit then if there's nothing in writing between that attorney and and the if it's agreed to that it's the agreed to account if there is nothing agreed to then it's a reasonable fee and then try and force the lien they serve notice on the defendant which happened here and then as soon as that notice is served the lien attaches to all of the proceeds at the time of the service and the attorney's acting under it's attached to the proceeds acting under the statute it doesn't have anything to do with a breach of contract action as nothing to do and the house you know associate has everything to do with whether there's a statutory leaving attached the attorney's only interest the supreme court said his in the proceeds of the litigation or it's settlement by serving notice claiming a lien the attorney in effect becomes a joint claim with his client and to the extent of the amount of his feet has the same interest in such proceeds as his client and is entitle to his program to share their up that's a direct quote from the philip morris case of that statute the only legislature wanted all attorneys of law to be able to get their their their fee whether was if it was not paid by their employer not paid by their partner whoever violated the agreement so that the attorney was not getting paid the legislature and the supreme court and philip morris made it clear that they want the attorney to be able to get those proceeds from the defendants that it's up to the court the lower courts adjudicate the amount that it's if the reasonable is a reasonable fee so there's obviously if you slam garcia long time ago he didn't get paid for it but someone else's i bill for that money as well then he can go against that other person he doesn't have to go against the person that employed him to swim in this case the legislature has said sure there's tancred law where you can collect against announcing an associate but there's a statutory lien when the defense counsel and the defendant whether it's an insurance company a manufacturer knows that the attorney or some other number of attorneys that work on the file the fact is the statute is very clear in the supreme court is very clear that you present law have a statutory lien in addition to whatever contract rights they have against their employers there is no behavior in any way was sanctioned both this request was simply following what the statute says to do it says to serve notice on the defendants that's what he did when he checked with the attorney he was still the attorney of record that's clear that he was the attorney of record time he served notice it and attorney client relationship if they're trying to say that mr thompson was not his client it is absolutely absurd to say that  he was he was doing all the work the corporation is not is not the attorney very clear of the laws clear and in fact was there was criminal penalties against corporations setting themselves out as if they were practicing law you can