when you are ready mr peters will hear from you relate to your first two points at least whether your current position is right is a medical provider within the scope of the indiana medical malpractise act or whether it is not it but if you're not a certified provider then you're in a somewhat different position from the point of view of tort law i don't see where you get a free ride on the patient contribution contributions of might be able to say i'm only responsible for perhaps two hundred fifty thousand of it or perhaps one point two five million of it although i don't know where the doctor reaches into the front bit but be that as it may we don't know we don't know if the doctor is going to contracting relationships you know maybe you have an outside contractor run the emergency room maybe you have an outside contractor run your urgent care clinic at a different location maybe you have an outside contractor indiana or do you haven't sign on the wall that says we're not responsible for any of these doctors here and we don't supervise them and don't come crying to us something goes wrong if you want to briefly we don't think sort of all public employees may be entitled to the defense of qualified immunity but the employer is not right you have you're pointing at a situation in which the agent or at least the apparent agent may have a defense but the employer doesn't have a defense is there some place else in the law where a personal defense for an agent would be applied to an employer i think this malpractise act is premised on somebody being a qualified medical provider and my feeling is you know if you are a qualified medical provider that would take us down one road but you insist very firmly that you're don't want to go too far down the road in hypotheticals maybe if there is some later common longevity action against the doctor indiana courts would recognize that the doctor's protection under the malpractise law so i went on c d s website i don't know if c d s website today is what it was back then but if you click on his website it says our radiologists and you click on there and there's dr walker represented as one of your radiologist providing for care when a patient walks into a health care facility be it a hospital be it a surgery center be it a pain management does that does seem a little hypothetical or do you think the supreme court of indiana require r to post a notice of all the indiana rules or tort liability that might conceivably matter to them no your honor it does not well that you know indiana law used this it's not something we can change but your proposition that the patient has a right to know everything that might affect them you have just immediately taken back now those two things that most affect them things like what would the liability of c d i be if something goes wrong they are never going to be told never your honor i don't believe that i said the paper has the right to know everything that's going to affect them i said what sort of repliers so distorted just to have a rule out multiple multiple branches of center for diagnostic imaging and with multiple multiple things but what we do know is that c i indiana was responsible for pretty much everything after the end and under sword again we're looking at the reasonable belief of the patients when a patient comes into a facility like that and she is everyone and towers and everything that happens to her that day dr walker or imaging consultants or medical standing or they do not your honor and also the proceeds from the image seems that are gon that the district court went to that finding was because of the arguments raised by by c b i and it's closer on motions and if there is a difference between a health care provider and a qualified he provider under the act as your honour's noted and questioning see the eyes attorney c d i was clearly a health care provider as your honor noted they were the ones putting the ids and they position the patients they take the images they do typically insurance wasn't sure how to save something and to pay an annual surcharge how the indiana act works is that a qualified provider is liability at the time of the the malpractise issue in this case  qualified health care providers and liability is limited to two hundred fifty thousand dollars for damages over that and up to an additional one million dollars those damages are paid by the indiana patients compensation fund the indiana pa compensation fund is funded by surcharges paid by qualified health care providers so this fund depends upon qualified health care providers paying those surcharges to pay th are not a qualified health care provider you don't get those protections three four eighteen three won indiana code expressly said that health or a health care provider who is not qualified under the act doesn't get t protections of the act and a claimant's remedy against that qualified health care provider is unaffected by the terms of the act i mean it must be common that there are some i mean actually i don't know who wouldn't want to be a qualified health care provider but let's suppose that they would often there would often be some people who are qualified health care providers and others who are not i mean supposedly i was literally just leasing the premises and other than that they turned it over to a medical practice all of whom were qualified health care providers so studio i at that in that situation be working with qualified health care providers but would not itself the one that would be true your honor and  you know it c d r words that are going to hear truly a landlord this argument might be a little different but for c b i to portray itself as merely a landlord here is directly in opposition to the evidence most favor think i think an argument would be more difficult if they were truly a landlord if that's all they were if might be a little more difficult but i would certainly make the argument that yes they would because  e factor or one thing that we have not touched on your honor because whether any of these arguments are even before this court process the district court ruling on anything further mr peters believe that it's a health care provider in any way and that's because the way the relationships are set up there's a service agreement between c d r indiana and medical scanning consultants which is the medical practice of professional