reciting it and after some discovery there it was determined that perhaps some other party should be involved in polk county we voluntarily dismissed refiled of one through court to put off substantially the discovery of hearings until finally we arrived here today and part of of that the court ok let me back up once stuff what happened in this case as far as we understand is that in minor subsidence claim with this insurance company with the state farm state farm then passed it on to the mine subsidence a group from the state of illinois they did a report they came back and said then seventeen through twenty two number seventeen that he didn't answer was a question about the foundation of if there were problems judgment was granted and you're arguing that the trial court erred doing so but your prayer for relief says by the way when you reverse the trial court reading their motion i guess what i am when i find out that it was a knee jerk reaction were here in the opposing court on the on in this case and these are the defendant or on his motion summary judgment doesn't necessarily follow all the your push for summary judgment states could base up our motion for summary judgment is based received the report that he knew that he asked because of damage to his foundation that he asked for an insurance review and then he came forward  of these questions heather seller answered that question through fully the my clients would know the condition and be able to make an informed decision as to whether to buy and which is the whole point of the residential real property disclosure report i like the statement said in one of the one of the the citron i can't remember which one it was was that the the intent the presidential real property disclosure report is for the prior to learn the same the very same facts about the property subsidence folks that the problem with this house is so that's exactly the term that's used and i'm seventeen is our problem with subtle and  case i was simply thinking in my own mind up pleasant it must be now rewarding to be practicing with one's child but that's saying you're the advocate before yes yes they did be a dispute about that given that the alleged conversation about how to fix what appears to be a problem perhaps  so that's why it's but doesn't that require the trial just the way that i mean some of it is its abilities in terms of you know whether somebody considers that a defect and whether they later fin any house built anywhere has the potential settle without there being real foundational issues but that's an inference that's not that's not i don't know if that's an industry standard or eno well the things that are that's what i guess that's the way i see it the things that we do check are the things are important and if you don't care about the other things enough to raise them then that's waiver or for here we have to do something about this well there's no indication whatsoever that after he got that report that he took any steps to further investigate  was never part of this record the judge you'll see in the responses even though the quotations that they have here for the for my clients depositions and they do know that that defendant knew about them and the nature and extent of them and we've got also a list of substantial expert reports the question i r was not related to what the defendant s