in that case the federal court to judicial notice of the fact that the that the planet had fired the other regional plank and it was two thousand and ten or whatever in state cour have been granted leave to file the st amendment we believe that it was not proper given the level of factors and here we were in titles who were hearing alters the specific allegations of the complaint that he is attempting to attack and this was at the point in time to or he wasn't allowing the filing of the st amendment when he wanted us to have the opportunity to have a hearing prior claim so as to provide a basis for defeating the motion for summary judgment judge seen as i think clearly recognized that under what all the factors the new st amend complaint a new complaint with these new allegations should not have properly vetted before the court and when the motion for reconsideration was gran to incorporate our prior motion so you know this case gets to the heart of the question don't pleadings have consequences our position is other evidence that was presented relative to the summary judgment motion relating just six to six hundred and nineteen go everything you've said is i think probably consistent with general precepts or concepts  lowly repetatively incompetent woman who was going to die from brain damage and the only question seems to be at least insofar as whether or not the if a person is disabled and i i used to prosecutor urgency commitments and the law at one time was that a person is subject to involuntary commitment of not waive defects in service and why was that it was because  mutually exclusive i think you can become aware of a cause of action and be legally disabled under that definition and by the way prescriptive record here the amount does not cause a slow deterioration and permanent brain damage and cognitive disorder she had it when she st started treating with my client in two thousand and eight but many people have asked and are not legally to say that the problem with them last because it is progressive person who filed suit in her own name cognizant of her cause of action explains exactly how it is she became cognizant of because of where the st time there's an allegation of legal disability is on may want of twenty thousand now this is almost three years after the loss of life if she became legally disabled after the statute of limitations has run and it ran evidence both written and oral testimony about all the information she was given concerning high sorry in a few days or there we filed our motion the motion for leave to file an amended complain why wasn't this filed earlier she's represented by counsel since sometime before july two thousand and fifteen and now they're claiming she's legally disable since back in november  her lawyers didn't know that i mean i've never had a case like this i'm i'm quoting from this court one of this courts because it's an order so i won't say the name of the case but you're quoting precedent a legal disability exists when a person completely lacks understanding or capacity to make decisions or to communicate his decisions and has a total inability to manage his estate i don't consider it an explanation for why her lawyers she's represented by counsel didn't allege legal disability when the complaint was originally filed in two thousand and fifteen if she was truly legally disabled a hold let's address the defendant's motion on the merits in what could have happened in should happen respectively is the guardian is goring should have been substituted as a party player the complaint before the court filed in october of twenty six teams should have been ruled on the ruling would have been in our favor violations the actual limitations no question about it and that counsel would have had his it this is my worst fears came true in this case because in in april of twenty eight when i was there with my combined motion and mr grimes her who was there with his motion for leave to file the st amended complaint alleging for the st time legal disability i discussed my concern that if my motion wasn't ruled on this was all going to become about the  amended complaint and legal disability which i don't think belonged in the case and i didn't think it was a family amendment and not about the discoverable everything that i characterized in that hearing his way would be my worst fears has come true because this is exactly where we ended up and i think if judge fien is should have abided by his original decision which was to rule on our combined motion i only wish judge freeness had been there that day because i think he would have made clear as he did in the hearing and hearing in the motion to reconsider that his intention was merely to allow mr gun's heard to have a client a proper client to think i don't know how to say i don't begrudge mr guns work for being an advocate for his client and for trying to inject the st amended complaint in response to our motion directly to the original complaint it's just my our favor each and every vector and i don't look i am mindful as i stand here is an advocate for the defense but this court is going to be concerned about what is and this is a hypothetical for me because it is in dispute when the legal disability you know hard cases make for bad luck she had her attorneys for three years who asserted the discovery wall and that when it became clear after a number of depositions that there wasn't going to hold the limitations period that came forward for the st time with an allegation of legal disability and i don't think that's proper either it's true i don't think it's proper even if it is true in this case yes and i know that sounds harsh but you know people represented by able counsel and there's case law on this and it wise to defense attorneys and plaintiff attorneys lawyers make mistakes every day and if somebody looks at this case and say hey the plaintiff lawyers made a mistake if they represent a legally disabled person as of two thousand and fifteen and she's been legally disabled since november twenty one of these should have asserted that point people make mistakes lawyers make in a timely way originally a lot of legal disability you can't pull that out later because otherwise is what this would just become i'm not saying in every case but i can envision scenarios like this unfolding all the