try to be right to the point what i usually am this is a death case it was the night from arbitration through the commission even though they didn't render a decision certain core of the commission didn't wri specific opinion and this is a manifest weight case and the wheedled is hoping they at you will determine and hopefully i can make an impact on all of you expelled out of those holes as everything in the disconnection the case has been avoided by the arbitrator which i believe is completely erroneous and even with his decision points out he didn't have an understanding what  what this technical freon refrigeration process is because it makes a note in his decision did you at times he did not find any evidence of freon in the the scenes by following his death that has to be established there is no question he died tragically yet to be existing condition there's no question he was exposed to but i think the question we're probably wondering about doesn't there have to be some quantum of knowing that exposure to some type of a harmful her husband going to the garage that evening carrying in the read recovery beds fool free on approximately two hours later well he's still stayed there she observed him leave the garage carrying out three empty commission i don't think you guys are going to let that happen this case as one of manifest weight of the evidence we are driven then to the familiar test under manifest which you've heard all so many times that you cannot reverse unless the industrial co decision offends the clearly evident playing and indisputable evidence you're also charged to give particular deference to the commission on medical questions the facts to you as if this were the trial he had his chance he asserts that freon caused a cardiac event in arrhythmia that killed mr fischer on june seventeenth two thousand and five there was a read creation of the conditions that existed on that day remarkably the widow retain all of this equipment in pristine condition in the garage  it was not until some forty years later that there was a test all of this equipment was available for testing i applied we came pretty late to the game to do our testing the first opportunity we had we perform a test by certified industrial hi genesis we don't know exactly what mr fisher did that night we don't know the exact this testing showed that between point six parts per million and fifteen parts per million of freon related into the atmosphere the ocean safe limit is one thousand parts per million the testing was done on march twenty three two thousand and nine point four six to one point five  far less than the industry standard one thousand say from the industrial commission is not unreasonable in accepting a standard generally accepted government o that said that the seated died as a result of exposure to for you dr who go but i criticize his findings because they are not based upon the testing are purely speculative he said there is some number under one thousand  agreeing with the cross examination question that a trace amount of freon over a long period of time would not cause sudden death and that a free on a level of fourteen or fifteen parts per million would not cause cardiac would not cause sudden death i apologize for the question not pack pagination but after page one of three council disagrees with the reconstruction that was done but he introduced no contrary evidence he could have done his own test we don't know maybe he did  all we have is twenty six point four six to one point five parts per million the respondents dr dr carroll says that could not have caused a precipitating cardiac event which condition just as likely could have caused death absent freon absent the respondent absent any connection with work whatsoever that's as to exposure now as to causal connection i repeat doctor who girl has pointed out in the arbitrator's decision than fourteen or fifteen wouldn't do let's go back to the testing for one second but in perspective let's imagine a football f zero parts per million is one goal line the other goal line a million parts from fifteen parts for million would be one and a half yard line and six tenths of a point fo six parts per million would be the six inch line the industrial commission is privileged to find that that small amount is insufficient to have triggered this man's with me is not an unreasonable medical decision for the commission to weigh the medical evidence the testimony of both doctors and importantly the only evidence of freon and to conclude that there was no connection between the employment and this man the plaintiff of course has the burden of proof he does not carry his burden of proof by criticizing our test instead of carrying his burden is asking this court to disregard the manifest with us and engage in speculation surmise and conjecture all prohibited you must take the evidence as it comes to you giving twenty minutes because it takes forty minutes to evacuate each we cover a bag so there's three disconnections is only one reasonable inference try from the wheels testimony it is not speculation it is real exposure and he actually inhaled songbook all of the freon contained in each disconnection in their balls connected to the empty recovery there up fails so that what do you think is designed for to keep it contained it has a smoking gun just around this out there is evidence in his record after this that sears does not permit their workers anymore to do this if their home the refrigeration techniques that is the scene it's done it is serious facility under supervision you can only come up with your own ideas why they don't want that anymore but let's talk about obvious in if you look at his report obvious there was no testing that would made anything first of all would be complete speculation note late defense said we have no idea what the defendant did that night although we can draw one reasonable inference he did disconnect those homes as three separate times and he inhaled some or all a free and every time but the but mr forlong obviously found the garage was unsafe to handle way testing wasn't done that's why there was no product liability case that's why there was no need to test the equipment because it's irrelevant when the deceiving contributed to his own  everything about it they got the answer they did and the commission should be rewarded for reland test it never addressed the unsafe conditions dismantling the line of his duty for his child he had to do this