that whatever the case law you really don't really need to restate that for us but what you do need to do is we did know your argument in light of the case law and i will say that it looks to me that your entire dealing here with a purported good faith purchaser an individual who is unfamiliar with the power of attorney didn't take you know directly through the power of attorney but you're seeking to impose some sort of burden on this mr ali that he has to check the recorder as documents to confirm that the title through whom he received that is the investment bell see was properly conveyed to him and i'm unaware of any case that imposes that sort of fur because it seems to me that you're basically destroying whatever but the protection that good faith buyers half want why doesn't the good faith  at closing at closing when mr ali received title he has only certain documents in front of him as does the title company and the power of attorney was not one of those she said she never signed so let's assume that testimony is now the next step is don't you according to the case is apt to shall be the signature that's after there it's not enough for her to say  well let me ask you this regarding that boy vs voidable issue you acknowledge in your brief if you had not i wasn't wasn't that one of the issues before the trial the circuit court judge whether the whether you had in fact established that the document was a forgery because our state so that was an issue before the judge and if the judge had said no that would make the film power of attorney not void because you need a conclusion that it was in fact four three before it can be deemed to be fully it was at best avoided bill and the question is did you hear been a case involving clara hurst as the l l c then i can understand where your attack is going to be on the power of attorney because we'll see should never have to rely on that power of attorney that on  is the consolingly why were they took off my impression of the reason that there there were two appeals because after the judge white made his ruling in this case the plaintiff filed a notice of appeal however at that time there was still pending because i know there was pending another portion of the action a claim by the mortgage lender against mr ali and that new one in the property and torched the property nor did he know that two weeks later another arsonist perhaps same one came in towards the property nor did he know that clara then appointed her daughter as her agent to of the sale of the home to north campbell that produces another two hundred fifty five thousand dollars and that those proceeds wait for the benefit of attorney and so the act was amended to provide to third parties good faith rely on a power of attorney even if the document is forward and you're relying on the emperor case yes ok and the amendment to the power of attorney why should the third party be able to because because of the law wants to get in particular as it relates to real estate title the law wants to protect the integrity of real estate titles and this is in the law poses a burden on the owners to protect their own property you have to we know what's going on with your property yes you don't you allowed to get sold two thousand and one and she never sued or any of her children or ginger dell or anyone else or any of the people that receive checks from any of these trained to  me i believe he did make those findings that she did not prove the elements of the jacket but i do also believe that the court recognized the fact ending a case after the plaintiffs one is where as a matter of law and the other is where there may have been a problem fish a case but the cross examination by the defendant i do agree with that and i believe as much as i'd like to say it was because we were losing my brilliant cross examination i believe that the judge was finding that it was i mean that they fell well short of meeting their burden  want the house they want mr alina's family out they want to impact lending to lose all his interest in the property and they want in addition to keeping the three hundred seventy thousand the house now certainly i suppose if you include light a moment in family yes they walk away with less abstentions money that three hundred some thousand dollars she didn't get that might she sold it for two hundred eighty thousand fifty insurance proceeds from the fire the rest was gone if you were file suit against to recover the