district court and now with this court about the circumstances of the draw all independently preclude any right to a charge and now with respect to actual cause it is you did that mr mock away from the group because of a disagreement over settlement posture large settlement demand along with the requirement that k s adopt an ethics program and he concludes unless that changes it will need to find new counsel and sure enough after this ultimatum failed to work mr moscowitz move to withdraw the very next day though in its papers mr moscowitz hit the ball about why he quit and concealed the settlement tilton made him from the district court so i submit that this appeal can be most straightforwardly resolved by comparing mr mock with the settlement ultimatum with this unreasonably difficult for the lawyer to be able to continue to represent the client effective thing and i respect i thought that the standard was just tossed and that was where where there are irreconcilable  on opposite ends in terms of how to over settled again is it in this dramatic with an email the other differences whether they were even reconciled or not and some of them were like that disagreement over experts because they weren't the straw that broke the camel's back by definition were insufficient and if the disagreement the fundamental disagreement concerned settlement is common seventy eight dollars to rule one dollar provides a disagreement over settlements involves a quote fundamental disagreement that permits withdrawal only where no reasonable person would take the client's position and while the district court did not rule on the reasonableness of my suggestion referring only to my purportedly according to mr mo for an attorney to resign thank you your honor i would submit that there would be conclusive evidence that mr moscowitz did not want to resign for any of those other reasons or all of them combined and here i would  other disagreement reference there unless your settlement posture changes you will need to plan you counsel and the corollary to that is if your settlement posture does change then you will not need to find new counsel had he truly found it too difficult to work with me and had that even been a substantial factor in the decision that i believe that a change in my settlement posture alone wouldn't have solved the problem and he would have said as much for example the attorneys in stinson beach city of new york which is cited in the briefing that the client change both a settlement posture and the her behavior and even in that case that this court found that the attorneys were not entitled to or charging rent because they withdrew over a settlement but here mr moscowitz didn't own conditioning the representation on only settlement and nothing else shows that those other reasons were not sufficient for him to want to withdraw ok thank you various legal issues in the case what's happening in this picture as i understand it is represents you as succeeded through summary judgment you yourself indicated that they had done based to that point you don't pay your bills you want to sell the lawyer you're working with you repeatedly invite the firms to withdraw if they don't want to work with you anymore they finally do based shouldn't get anything even now misleading this court by making provably false statements as was the subject of the motion to supplement then when the lawyer tried to coerce the client into changing their settlement  re lien would be it's an equitable matter for her to thank you will now hear from your adversary thank you honor may please the court and but you went back responded differently within the minute it was the scripture i was i was i was going from the record that was on appeal and i went through the record and i was incorrect could probably something up now is mr duffy not paying his bills on time not only was extremely different client but there's no forseeable prospect of resolving out of the case the difference of transit jaffe and again i just want to point out the issue is not the amount of the settlement the district court found there never was posed to be a comprehensive recitation of all the reasons why we are withdrawing mr droppy step meaning email and i responded it was not intended to be a comprehensive recitation of the of the entire states he did in fact agree to disagree and respect the other's opinion rockets in south dade in his briefing before this court that this is the central issue that his claim so near days before he moved to withdraw until the district court that he just couldn't get along with me anymore he was privately reassuring that the exact same time the opposite that we would agree to disagree and respect the other's opinion at a time when trial with months away and sometimes