lien on a property is secured to the extent of the creditors interest in the interest in the property in other words to parse that the in light of the purpose of the evaluation and the proposed distribution or use of the collateral and in conjunction with a carry on the disposition or use of the property  didn't actually quite a number of cases say that there can be multiple valuations of the collateral depending upon the reason we are doing it in chapter eleven for instance you might have are we going to has the discretion to consider purely legal issues on appeal the trustee has not arriving any prejudice as a result of this so it squarely before the court but who exactly did argue before the court this was a change in position with bankruptcy unfortunately it's very easy to bally money it's you know he has so we don't need to have an expensive hearing we just have to recognize that the proper valuation is the date when we're going to put that property to would argue should value the property as of the date of that motion because we have to look to see if it is your creditor as equity i'm sorry whether the debtor has equity whether the power is necessary to reorganization and other things of that matter on the other hand if we're looking at a post over it then we would use that claim under fifty six dollars in a chapter seven liquidation we provided pieces come from the middle district of florida a judge still with the judge in this case described it and the reason is very simple the purpose of the chapter seven liquidation is a liquidity and as a result under the bankruptcy code the assets are composed of everything that existed as of the in which there were management fees that were collected by the trustee and it turned into cash for example according to according to mr temperaments there's going to be eight million dollars of asset with multiple senior junior you have to figure out who gets paid who doesn't and how much they get paid and especially when you're dealing with collateral pools in which there are competing there are could be multiple creditors who have multiple people don't have the same collateral you have if i understand your argument you're saying that in this particular case these particular so you know to say that the judge made a mistake by agreeing with mr government until the hearing and that even though he has discretion and even though everybody else does that somehow this is particularly  and by the way i understand that that when you're talking about the disposition these are these are rights to payment there might be twenty different disposition dates i don't know what the demon going to be i don't know how i mean not talks about what happens if the collateral increases in value and that's what dues that was about and so if you have if you have if you're wholly under secured and the collateral increases in val because we we provided evidence and said that it was no more than eight million dollars and we liquidated and we gave notice of of how much we changed from the collateral that's the best we can do and were which the bankruptcy judge properly thought were were were not rock reliable and he said so they didn't describe what collateral they have and they continue including in the reply i believe saying well we didn't  we liquidity that's what we have and in the event that that that eighty eight million dollars litigation claim becomes of value in that week of that event and they have a lien on it the that what really happens here is that the brewer group jumped up when we were aware when attorneys were being paid and said oh no we have a lien we looked at the group plan they don't really say what  we tried to figure it out it was an order it said that they don't have a lien in the rights to payment we weren't worried about the litigation claims that may or may not be worth eighty million dollars we don't think so and then what happened is that in two this motion so the idea that we that we that there's been six years and we would be litigating with these people i was six years the idea that we somehow sprung it on him it's just not true and of course it is the that is the land terms of the law generally don't seem to be at odds all that much except that you believe that in this case the judge picked the wrong day  no one argued that this was a discretionary germination by the judge the argument was that the law makes the fault it perhaps mindy's the use of the petition if you rea our lean went to the cash so that cash has value jury in the course of the bankruptcy the claim of the secured creditors who is senior to us was diminished twice once by a settlement and the lien and that is why we look to what is the property actually going to be put to use in this case distribution of creditors and if this is a value money it's a value of money we also point out