i don't see a lawyer step up again we had a discussion with justice taylor and since he participated in these proceedings trial court level he's going to recuse himself from participation in the appeal you know we have a third up panel member  i believe justice house will participate as the third panel member in this case he'll obviously listen to the arguments that are presented today which are all court and then available on line as well and we'll would in the state i believe they still be pending or certainly was pending for quite a while up to page county with respect to this matter and the expenses of that estate would have been chargeable to that money so the and it by definition is going to be smaller amounts of money and if it's incorrect then the possibly actions against the person will result of this was they were the banks liability because i believe the bank like every other percentages here it's you know it's percentages between the three and my suggestion my argument is that the bank is in a much better position than your average person like violet rather well to kno complaint to defeat summary judgment when you don't file account re activated to deny or to suggest that there was a tree lift that may be true and the athlete is so to which i believe it is how do you prevail here how do we reverse the granting of summary judgment when there was no how to react a bit to dispute the testimony the material testimony that no relationship was formed an attorney client relationship charge forty five hundred dollars to do a small states out there if there had to be some factual discussion about what was going on yes but just because attorneys tell someone that if you want me to represent you you're going to have to pay the forty five hundred dollars   go there's an attorney client relationship well misread well it was a prospective client i believe it was passing on information to mr coe foggo are you moving on to the notion that having what i believe a substantive discussion about what's going to happen in this estate or what may happen in owning a fee of forty five hundred dollars and compile also says that he received from mr romeo u misread well stead that that was too much money it was too expensive and she wanted to contact other attorneys the telephone conversation ended without plaintiff's retaining me to details of your state provides these handwritten less and apparently direction about what was supposed to happen with the estate it's my suggestion that mr romeo is acting at some level as an agent of the state you theory i'm not sure i understand what he is or i don't i don't know well what theory are you leaning against what duty did he have to do anything was specifically asked towards me there has to be a duty correctly and what is well as to romeo now moving away from the fun of which i was simply trying to process that i thought that all of his all of romeo's actions towards the final  of the state as the widow and she has a preference over the two stepsons circling so that hit won't be always actions are on behalf of your state id misread well this is in addition to the conversation that  contract or what or what is the contract ok i'm not that then i guess i would have to ask you if this was a contract what was in it for mr romeo i mean there has to be some reason something situation for him to be undertaking whatever it is you're saying he had a duty to do that that's what i guess i'm getting at i don't i don't see anything that was occurring there other than one friend talking to another friend and then yes when someone to do something doesn't find to do it from the west that they share both a professional and personal a ship that they have done business together in the past and that this transaction was of that nature of a business relationship where what would the consideration would be if i ask you to pick up my cleaning where in your complaint you allege that mr romeo benefited by way of some consideration that's fair because i think in my complaint i do mix those cause of action tonight knowledge that duty as a negligence concept breach of contract obviously which of an agreement od contractual breach of contract and the question is where or why elect some consideration that romeo was received for this making it more than just a favor between personal friends as opposed to the professional side of that relationship frankly i think the context relationships you know i say do this for me and you say you k s consideration if there's an expectation that you're going to get paid certain way well you allege anywhere in your weight that there's an trying to lead to two of them in addition to having some friendship header which is no question they have a professional relationship with each other and since this is i believe in the nature of more of a professional  over recent case from the sport that dealt with that and i've tried to distinguish it based on contract theory but whether or not he's a friend or being paid doesn't exonerate because the final is receiving information from the estate at that point after mr read well on dives where he actually gets these documents from only zero and now when he goes  up and you'll have to tackle so it's a series of unfortunate errors all connected all of which have damaged this rat well and i don't think because state active provisions and the financial has no responsibility and she admits such in her brief when she concedes quote the villain point of m p bank is concerned section twenty five dash one of the probate act which speaks  section subsection one deed for the provides the bank is then released from all liability once appears out pursuant to those terms again there's no dispute that the bank paid out pursuing those terms of paid out ten thousand dollars more to the plaintiffs about thirty thousand then to the two stepsons about twenty thousand dollars each is just palmer up correctly pointed out the statute provides never relief for the plaintiff through any recipient of section two point one of the overt act by but they could be further from the case the poor way to have provides a coherent framework for distributing assets up in the state you have a small state which is less one hundred thousand dollars those assets can be distributed pursuant to just the affidavit as opposed to if the decision dies intestate and probate seatings are initiated then those assets are distributed outside support of ten thousand dollars to the plaintiff that's why she got ten thousand dollars more the statute was later amended in two thousand and ten three years after the decision passed the way to increase that amount to twenty thousand clearly doesn't apply in this case she got  never had a conversation i finally ever did any work or to see for there was no relationship between them whatsoever the only thing they have in common was lewis romeo now several months five hundred dollars she says i want to talk to other lawyers and that's it there is no evidence about any more extensive conversation and that is undisputed so there was no attorney client relationship that aro conversation identifying assets of the cd i think we all have to remember that this is intestate proceeding and there's nothing confidential about those documents everything is going to be done in the fresh air in the sunshine  n as to where that kind of speculation comes from there in the support for it there is still a speculation that rule of professional conduct one point he teen regarding prospective clients memorialized practic that she knows about six months later the check shows up she goes back and back again and says why is this check here she's trying to deal with the estate so while the percentages here oh are sixteen into th pilot should have fifty percent she's got a thirty three and one third percent one could easily see if there were four children m r a widow and you would have under the scheme that was presented here ten you know twenty