order from the minnesota supreme court denying the petition for writ do you know something of what that means that all matters that are far the jury verdict in minnesota have been resolved contingent judgement and so if i understand correctly the posture is it's just there's another issue to return to minnesota after the oregon case is resolved it winds up returning in the form of a new appeal to the but subject to an automatic stay because in minnesota the post verdict motions that in some jurisdictions take place prior to judgment minnesota that take place after something's been filed label's the judgment for the trial court hasn't passed on which i'm sure you're familiar with but first this in terms of the print all of the n c both make references to things that happened subsequent to january two thousand and three but if i understand correctly these instructions are being given either october or november of two thousand and two is that correct yesterday and next it's my understanding that the jury came back in effect answering the question by saying that yes horde these claims are barred but there is zero in that category and lording damages in the amount of thirteen point two million saying all of that fit within one of those with the judge below help actually against us was that one element of our right to recover the cost to repair was that we'd be legally liable so that's where that the first line of the jury instruction came from  stole that well for us to be released clearly the claims of these customers have to be covered by class and there are exceptions to those claims covered by the class one of  tell the jury what the law is as i see it in the sort of and that is for the jury to sort out the evidence which was very fast and very confusing at the trial on this class action it was far from clear but now you know point is they put in the opt out some places i've read that have long since lost track of where it was the that something like six hundred thousand dollars was paid to to your clients customers as in the record in place yes that was the last day of the trial  that case limited to the circumstances when there's actual legal liabilities for business need our position has always edition to the other part of the liability is that we had a independent injury which had a pressing business which propelled us to minnesota we will not have a business this is repeat business so we have a very serious injury which the class action does not resolve for us and we are proceeding to recover our own damages for our independent injury providers and in force nationwide consumer class actions terms and also threatens to undermine the motivation and willingness of manufacturers to enter into such consumer class action settlement started possibly not your honor here's why the motion limit it was to exclude references to the class action and that was denied before and there was no advanced notice that the testimony would be from the president to the class members that if they give money to lester's lester will turn around and repair the class members property there was no advance notice of that and when that testimony was uttered in trial court a lot of parts or i'm not sure exactly when but when that testimony was uttered in trial especially the light went off for lp over l p s had to say wait a minute what you're doing is standing in for the class members you are asserting claims to reeva testily on behalf of the class members that's what they're not allowed to do everything else they are allowed to do they are allowed to stick their own past lost profits they are allowed to seek their own cost to restore their good will and their own other are caught they were allowed but are not allowed to step into the shoes instead you can just regarding this is what the judge effectively said to the jury you can go ahead and disregard the district of oregon's class action settlement if you find that the siding might fail i think that's a fair reading worried isn't there and here is a jury instruction if erroneous subject to being reviewed but in a civil court because then the same thing could happen in fifty one jurisdictions and even multiple lawsuits in minnesota the whole point of having a federally federal court approved very complex class action settlement and retaining the jurisdiction both to enforce it and to interpret if you but this is no longer a problem with what the president said on the stand the two  here's here's why at the time that this trial was tried in october of two thousand true it was still eligible for class members to file claims in settlement and i said your honor there are two claim spurious claims can be filed up until december thirty first two thousand and two so there's still another month and a half or two months to go for additional claims to be filed which will automatically be paid in addition every class member under the first actual settlement has continuing rights under the class action for basically another twenty five years that is they could find a claim that would be independently inspected by courts to revised inspectors but then more i don't believe there's any evidence that any letters customers have opted out but if there was evidence that would have been evidence of an opt out then those act out folks was what i was one other potential carrier which is probably the troublesome one which is somebody who difficulty being expressed there is somebody that hasn't put any because they did know they had a problem and two years subsequently have a problem but it's past explained and they don't they still have the opportunity to make and to receive compensation from lp under the class action here's why when it's a it's a two part process there was a seven year open window for filing claims with the independent court approved claims administrator you must find a claim no later than december thirty first two thousand to go to backtrack however two you still didn't have your full remedies against louisiana pacific under its twenty five year warranty express warranty from the date that you purchased it so even under your example judge burton if someone did not know that they had damage or had a client which will say two thousand and three of two thousand and four they still have rights under the court approved class action settlement for the balance of the twenty five years from when they bought the property i recognize that these are very subtle  many terms and for that reason that's why it's important to have the federal judge that approved this settlement and understands the settlement to ensure that these terms are enforced for everyone's protection the cl that resolved or travel to another court we have the last case talked about a settlement agreement and yet it's not routinely the custom that you always wind up returning to the original court to have a resolution as to what it was the or the the court's judgment was supposed to so why is it here some other court isn't allowed to go forward to speak for itself because of the number of federal service are recognized your honor they're all class action law is complex the settlements are oftentimes complex and have nationwide settlements and there is a great deal of mischief and potential damage that could be done by state courts misinterpreting or misapplying federal class action settlement because of the nature of the federal class action time and i believe were overruled now i do believe in the dynamics of a trial that's going on in minnesota the ability then to go in the middle of the trial to run into the district court i submit is not particularly practical i also do some of your honor that we did get into the federal court ended up in the relief from this just for the judge to love from the district court below before judgment was entered and i understand it was after the verdict was read i do recognize that but the case law that i'm familiar with know but certainly there has to be dividing line somewhere that's clear and bright and gives the litigants an understanding of what they have to do and when they have to do it we submit that that the president shows that dividing line is when judgment is entered and we did satisfy that that it's too late if you've done it at some point after some advance you put in verdict but before judgment the only cases that i've seen on this in the only cases that i've been submitted on talk about after judgment has been entered and that is  to try to you know wait to see what happened in the jury before going to the district court it was a simultaneous process of sort of you know realizing from what was going on at the trial they act they are not just they are no longer asserting their own interest own lost profits and cost to restore goodwill but they are acting basically instead of the class members that was the primary problem that didn't happen essentially to midway through trial the testimony of the president now if the courts rule was well once to get on a calendar of a district judge i submit that that's a very difficult and probably practically impossible ex mind to suspect and i just i'm at the clearest line your honor is when judgment is uninjured and in conclusion your honor i do believe that trial judge below did correctly perceive your honesty i do believe that the trial judge below did correctly perceive that if the type of action of lester is bringing is allowed to succeed it would open up the floodgates to these types of actions find middle well that was the first or that would be a matter of i think then forced for state law but what the problem comes your honor is when lester says to the jury that we're going to use this money to make to appear you know your bars and to make it work i don't think they can say that because once they say we're to repair the barns then they are stuck effectively stepping into the shoes of the class members and creating multiple classes or so classes the favored classes only those folks who are the customers of lester's and  for classes namely everybody else who's not a customer of lester's what they can say is we want the money for ourselves we've lost profits we've lost goodwill we want to be compensated for that they then have their appropriate measure of damage for compensation for damages to themselves and if that's appropriate under state law and that's what a jury chooses to give them that's what the church should have to give them but they can't then step into the shoes of say and part of what we're going to do is to get the money for the class mistrial but by the same token if they have a claim they're entitled to make they now have an injunction preventing them from making that claim i mean he had told us that when i argued in the minnesota court of appeals that that with this case law elsewhere there is appropriate for us to this evidence that the real beneficiaries are going to be the farmers a wink wink nod nod rule for us in the farm role for making out you know you want to because any other rule would undermine the ability to have a federally approved class action settlement between consumers