investors camps retirement despite the fact that the retirees no longer work at the company they retain their voting rights and they retain their activities and maintain their activities with respect to the unions and here in that capacity was somewhat mobile and his opposition to the union leadership that had agreed to the kind of back and benefits for or retirees like himself there was an election that was coming at a local my seventy four in peoria and the day before the election mr camp had some a letter to their union leadership so that the retirees could potentially recoup some of the benefits that they lost gave chapman time russian was the president of the local dave chapman message on their recorder threaten him with ham later that same day mr chairman the president of the local hall back and left another threatening phone message in which he also camps the camps subsequently felt safe in their own home they were intimidated they contacted me and here we are the trial this court examines for the first time the allegations in the light it's the highest position that they have clearly stated the cause of action after all the issue before this court is not whether or not  separate defendants here  between two adversaries in which one of the adversaries is talking about the body of his other adversary then that will expand exponentially judicial involvement in creating a code of political correctness the this here is not a single case that we have found nor appellants inside the permitted a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress to be based on  separate legal existence of the international and local not be conflated this is an unusual case i will agree with counsel that this case came up in the past year of the two sixteen stayed there never was a tool one a rule to a one down motion that authorized the filing of the discovery especially when we were only at the pleading stage nonetheless the deposition respectfully this court decided remains in the record and they we answering machine on which they sue chapman sincerely apologize listening to it there's no one could form a conclusion other than that he truly was sorry he assured them no harm would befall in the same way that the alleged cause of action is based and using an objectively reasonable man standard based on the record in this case this court should not permit this cause of act whether either bainbridge or chapman at the turning of their statements were acting in their official capacity or in their private capacity as a luxury homes political candidate and and on the extended of emotional harm and i'm alleged emotional distress other than they've lived in fear of safety as a result of the threat is proven by the fact that they shouldn't possibly plead any sort of emotional to the fact that there are these players as scientists have never disputed that place has fully recognized that the moving seventy four is a different city incorporating separately from the international and even if this court were to decide that the allegations in the complaint don't state a cause of action against the international media that's not to say that plaintiffs have not stated the cause of action against the wall who president made the these threats this issue with respect to the apology that mr chapman apologize he didn't do that in person he did that only after he was arrested single three this isn't a single thread and there were two different voice messages while there was a threat in the parking lot the day of the election is in there was a threat in writing by mail subsequent to