not at all address the issue of post judgment and that's rather it's a prejudgment case so obviously the court would he have discretion in the standard would be abuse of discretion in relation to at nine percent in this type of case must be tendered on the final judgment so the issue in this case is simply whether or not the trial court irig as a matter of law concluding that there was a full tender and for for purposes of argument i will agree with counsel that we should look at that february sixth two thousand and seven letter which of can there be a tender eyed letter or does a tender have to be a check i believe the tender has people and are there any cases that say that it could be done by letter i i do not i know there there was some indication in our brief that that might be possible i don't recall that case where it is possible to make a tender eimear letter without tendering shakopee look at some of the we by our conduct we didn't we we did something inappropriate rather he said that this letter was formal tender and that was his holding so to that extent i think the  he has to have to consider their act but there's also case law that illinois railroad case thirty am for which states that so i don't think we even get there first we have to ask was there a full and there was and by virtue of the fact interest wasn't even if you could make tender right by way of letter there by way of this letter they did not even include the interest would you agree that your first letter that you wrote when you said you didn't you know wording and of course as you guys attack you would we can't get into that and just wanted to point that out to you but you know and we have a legal right not to answer it thereby rejecting any improper tender absolutely this was not a complete and full tender by of failing to respond to the letter although it was  perhaps a nice thing to do we were effectively and legally rejecting the terms and we had a right to do that and i think with their i will unless you have any further question jurisdiction to that is no fourteen no one motion here judge as you may know on this this case was once before this court for a completely different issue it was all i understand that but you see jurisdiction  judge i believe that the does a letter tell us when you're going to pain i believe the letter itself asked the plaintiff in counsel for information so we're able to say absent the information from counsel we county the clerk certainly you're on it you ought to pay any interest to you that's true your honor but i would also make the alternative argument that the letter was an offer to pay and the conduct of the plaintiff excused any further think that case is on point for the case here today mainly because the case here today revolves around a letter that was that the counsel requested costs and as i was stating counsel even if thirty days are if you don't know to say you don't know judge i don't know it but in that letter we requested certain information specific information where we wouldn't have been able to make it tender without the nation days that interest would not be had it there's no way to start that clock back up again and i believe that was also included a plaintiff that they have it which is in in the record that we were to hold off on issuing drafts for thirty days and that because the plaintiff may appeal i don't know that the plaintiffs explicitly saying that they're not entitled to interest for those thirty days but i think their actions reflect that and once they've stopped that clock there was no action which instead plaintiffs up hold off for thirty days we may appeal we wrote a letter february sixth of two thousand and seven asking for that information instead of responding we simply filed the appeal which as your honor pointed out correctly the plaintiff simply can't be silent makes facts that the the defendant is going to be able to magically port number out of a hat and make a proper tender without the proper information instead of you know being proactive i'm not attempting to shift the burden on a plaintiff to say this is exactly what you owe me but they do have to at least take some proactive steps and died just not let the clock run to accumulate more not the case here and if you go back to the letter suggesting they are we would wait the thirty days they are getting up itself shows that there was no intent there eight