central issue for all of up they should be entitled to be covered damages that would place him in the position he would have occupied but for snodgrass in evanston is malpractise which is the difference between a properly diversified portfolio and his now with a minute the fout something else before we start dealing with labels let's talk about just how this thing reasons out what you're talking about in the allegations that  who is not there to protect your investments because that's not his area of expertise his area of expertise and the reason you've come through the attorney is so that he can guide you in making were under an underlying contractual duty or trust agreement that there were embedded in their duty duty to recommend diversification or to actually do it a it promised the people that you're relying on you're like that the question and the ultimate issue of damages ok basically i mean can you honestly say ever that the negligence of mr snodgrass in the adult negligence advisors for example and you raised that issue with your brief i think it's a well established so that when you hire somebody to protect your staff to protect your interests and your staff to prevent you from losing occasion issue has a scene acquiring land for and i find that kind of interesting that you are now telling all financial advisors throughout the country that they're suffering they may more than that but i'm the other hand if the the expert testifies that the standard of care is for a financial advisor is never to allow the client to put all his eggs in one basket then you can travel with that and your expert does seem to rely on that aspect in making his causation determination right so if we took your theory and plug into your theory we still have a the ethical violations that were committed as well as the violations of the state here so you don't think that's a problem but you keep talking about the violation of the standard of care see where you know i i think we're centralising here  ok we'll give you a chance to respond to all of them who's going first almost report expresses the sanction between causation fair and causation law yet and then i know why they did that i don't know because they've got a whole batch of a whole generation of lawyers are confused and i'm being recorded  but wouldn't it be easier just to ted to go to the traditional one that was a saying there could be more than one proximate cause where everybody agrees on that is why don't we agree more than one proximate cause in any particular situation yes  question becomes is you know as you move farther and farther away in terms of actors contributing to the entry with a loss the issue approximate cost begins to fade and the one of them happens to being my case glassware says get clear which is a case that of malpractise against the lawyer for failing to advise his client that the law lawyers all of a sudden become the insurers of their clients risky portfolio and in this case you have the the plaintiff's own testimony says that he wasn't expecting door the defendant the lawyers to provide monday morning he would say heads and sure enough monday morning he closed bankruptcy and the stock is worth and but it is also important that live right next to legal advice does not necessarily have to be broker when does he become a financial advisor if that's right and that if we look at the situation that we have here are there is no evidence that our overall out the three or four in a language that's correct ok oh so are you saying then even if we would agree that there is loss causation that there's other grounds for liability in this case this past has not been consecrated don't worry about it's also good but if you're directing that is my inquiries about malpractise actions i'm not saying nor am i ok but my my proposition was not to simply put malpractise in a different category but malpractise involving a contract or an arrangement to watch the safety of your stock and the argument didn't have to question whether the occurrence of of the market depression or recession is something that is within the scope of duty a testimony there so it's both reached th