important cases when you take the fact that every one of the employees witnesses testified to this incident that my client fistfi the employees insurance company paid some fifty four thousand dollars through his second operation he was he was operated on he was operated on on m fifteenth two thousand and eight and nine days later four days later he had a class longer to come back again tore off all the operation that the first first operation payments oh oh compensation by an employer who's not constitutional viability that's right but it doesn't say affects anything else an argument is that it has a tacit credibility of their witnesses totally conflicting medical wonders dependability there well the credibility is that this was a actually had a dual nature it's the time it started and the time it was repaired of injury and that in our application it said he heard his back then on that date and then he continued to go get worse by his continual continual use of that of that shoulder and that's one of the arguments in this appeal is that they never rule on the theory of or injury they show he didn't know you're just is shoulder moving a piano on september twenty second he did know he injured his ship shoulder but he thought that when  doctors in the emergency room of the hospital was because until he had an m r i he didn't know for sure what it was but knew it started an hour develop very slowly at first and so on what was it about the  that's all but as to what he had bent was that caused him to earth what would the m r i have to do with to what he attributed it to because in his mind and his memory it traces back to that day in two thousand and three so even a bar fight that's right if you don't have the fact they pay fifty four thousand bucks this i would even be here because there's all kinds of evidence that destroys his case every one of the employees witnesses absolutely contradicted his testimony one hundred eighty degrees and i'm here to tell you john that no one with if it never happened which they say it never happened no one would have paid fifty four thousand bucks so that's your socially argument your argument is it doesn't matter what the testimony was right there could be a fifty five thousand means you should automatically win the appeal no i yes i think i mean that's your credibility out like you say the statute says it's not a because based primarily on this thing about being thrown to the floor in a bar fight he said that there was no cause of connection the national shows there was no evidence in the you want to my question is if that if they have that argument when they sent to the first doctor dr gray why wasn't that mentioned it was never mentioned when we took the depositions of the various doctors here no one ever mentioned the fact this didn't happen which to me flies up and and overwrites i just i just i just feel that when you take this whole thing together and they all came up after he had he had the second operation it all came up after that where they tore out with the first operation did i think it's i think a fair bit any think basis it would not have paid the appealed the decision of the commission the commission's decision was unanimously against him and that is why h that the employees witnesses were not the ones that pay benefits it was the insurance company that said there is no evidence in the factory that when this is of a new or that the benefits were paid and whether or not through this is kind of a case of first impression i feel obligated to take this appeal because there's a basic contradiction here you have