yes a federal court judge inter breeding illinois law not a detail order and memorandum explaining why each of the theories that he proposed in federal court were invalid and not seat construed that as a separate lawsuit where he was the cell defendant he believed would be diversity of citizenship as to the request for sanctions he believed that under federal law the with this respect let's let's just parse that out so let's take take it in stages because the imposition of a dollar amount as a part of the function is a separate issue and the court could impose sanction there had been no determination of the merits of the case there's been no presentation at any time that the factual allegations in the lawsuit were incorrect what we had is a statement by a person in february of two thousand  that there was no factual basis for the allegations and the let's assume for purposes of our you know right now though we're going to conclude that the standard review of the actual order finding sanctionable conduct is portion where in response case of this test but let's assume that we're going to review it for an abuse of discretion and taking apart putting aside the amount of sanctions what is your explanation we say that this order represents an abuse of discretion knowing what the use of discretion means in will we look to sign whether there have been pleadings that were filed in violation of rule one thirty well first initially yes propes did determine it didn't she that one of the things she concluded was that this action was right for the specific purpose to create a conflict so that that could the wise read representation by an attorney in a given case i began late may i mean today by referring to the fact that mr klein had already created that conflict in two thousand and seven mr the lawsuit was filed in federal court he told judge moore girl on the record i told you about this no one said no you didn't he continued to say everybody knows about this nobody said no we don't and in two thousand and nine when they issue came up whether the latest action so i have no concerns at all about a perception of bias and judgment varies part of anybody else's and if this were not in the state of the query is acting on behalf of the state of illinois for the interests of the world i would not expect a court to comment on whether someone ought to consider or not consider pursuing action for the benefit of that point however in the minors the state in this state with the arguments made by your opponent is that you have failed to cite the record for all of your contentions that you don't really cite any part of the record or for the vast majority of your statements you haven't cited the record on appeal now you're you asked for someone else some point to present a partial correct but that was m could of farm this sanction order you know just because you haven't provided us with a sufficient record and always we presume when the record isn't complete that the court acted in accordance with general principles of law so why shouldn't we just simply out of this case i believe your honor that my failure if the court could see it is my failure and not mr information you don't find a disagreement as to the facts you don't find that you know what i've said these transcripts say and what i say these pleadings say is wrong and you don't find that what i failed to refer to in the other cases i think doesn't change that there's a terminations under this case of sanctions i don't think that the brief supplied by the parties hearing that was denied then curtailed to go fifteen or thirty minutes an examination on the merits in the course of the case and the presentation before judge probs i also argued that we needed to have a determination the sanctions then the determination of the amount of sanctions and in the course of those arguments i was told by judge profanities like at one point in order by judge probes that first would be determination of whether they were say should go misconduct then there would be a determination of the sanctions and the parties would present their positions when judge approach ruled sanctions my adversaries sought reconsideration because they had never put in any evidence of their attorneys fees they sought to increase the se case and we never had the opportunity to address the question of what would be the appropriate sanction for a bad case given what this person did so the estate he sees the net benefit if there's a recovery because the amount of money they pay fees is offset by a hundred thousand dollars and none of this was discussed presented and frankly a credit to gets the sanctions work they have to pursue corrections the same as a word through bankruptcy or whatever when the ceremony is sitting in the circuit court but that's not my problem but this is the consequence think running into well understand as someone who practices the more i understand the frustration that anybody in a position of responsibility especially on a case as difficult as this i don't believe that a court in the exercise of discretion the word sanctions when there is no basis on the walls for doing so and that's what my case comes down to there is a legitimate basis i have i presented a basis for every one of the have there been any basis to consider sanctions the process by which it was done here was not the right process because one last question we're going to have time for republic well but one of the conclusions that gross me was that if you just you have this fact that she concluded this you're going to sell ski continued to prosecute the claims after the parties themselves had disavowed the allegations what is your response to that finding and i believe there is support for a finding that the parties had disavowed the allegations instead of dismissing the action mr nov true let's assume that the order is is wrecked there is no use discretion up in the worst the sanctions you know you're not concerned with the fact that that two lawyers had to defend against this lawsuit and that that the fees that they had to expend to defend themselves with your representation isn't something that you are concerned with you don't think that it should be corrected in terms of at least a hearing or further findings as to how the amount was determined twenty five thousand  impact the consideration of the application of rule one thirty seven when the purpose is simply comply nish the attorney for the attorneys condom and you're talking about one hundred thousand dollars this is not as your one hundred would suggest the kind of  nction that would be independently significant but not financially oh presses and that sense just screams for what you did stop that kind of sales one hundred thousand dollars and that is the kind of punishment that is reserve unusual if this amount had been heated with hundred thousand dollars in terms of the hours that the rules yet to expand to defend against  have to speculate for the record for purposes of analysis and what mr novus also his response would have been to a very motion for sanctions the specified a dollar amount bad he would say i choose not to contest it if he were in that assume that he would have a choice and that notwithstanding what we all have green about his personality from our past experience and what we see on this record he still would be entitled to look at a motion for sanctions that says i am out the the the one thirty seven sanctions here does have that right which that that is is opened up not specifically tied to which one you sees we have not found cases that have recognized an affront to the application of bad sanction in bad manner in the only case or even really in federal cases under will grab what we have because of that we have to look at why is that and i suggest to the court that the reason why that  is because there is an effort to protect the entire system and the trial court's job should not go into all these every areas and become a target for any other case as i feel unsafe because the fifty thousand dollars on top  standards of presenting the motion should be high and there should be a connection between the sanctions amount and the presentation of evidence of friendship in this case in the only case with very little defense activity asked for a specification for a motion for sanctions and i suggest in a court that that is intended not just to protect the attorney who sanctioned the protect the circuit court how could the record not alone since we had the order in front of us which is if you give me details of wouldn't you say that we could easily just say we presume the court it did in accordance with the law the motion for sanctions