reach judgment because this case the issue involved is authority to already assad is a matter of law so i'd like to go to the plea and documents and documents are very clear that the it for liability to determine if that principle was liable to me and then to grant equitable relief my request was for equitable relief not damages you can apply any label  was money you were seeking but your honor i was claiming future damages if you will damages from august not standard damages she will yet future damages if you don't get any  committees but not the plant committee didn't want to terminate me they just they couldn't pay my compensation because principal life who was the custodian of the funds would not pay my compensation so they were in breach of the contrary clique he thought they had no choice but ultimately to end this thing and terminate me but you know so i don't understand this thing about i'd like to talk about a resignation in theory if you have an employee who's getting paid and he resigns you tell the employee well look you're may have a piece of the prior compensation but the future compensation you resigned you don't you can't claim it that but that's not true when you have in a player who stops p just would pay the terms of the summer agreement you indicate that you voluntarily signed it that you've resigned and that is from that point backward but i didn't really i didn't really resign i resigned to whether or not we should have entered into the settlement agreement whether he likes the settlement agreement whether he's unhappy about not being the attorney for the plans anymore that's all water such a notice or direction or inquire into the reasons i and thirty three served or its contractual obligation had principle continued to pay mr foster  the dispute already arisen between mr prosser in the plans prince let nothing whatsoever to do with that dispute learned about the fact much later when principal not knowing what to do started compliance investigation that's certainly the opposite of intentional that's quite reasonable principle is getting letters to mr foster saying pay me and not getting and they're not getting any directions to pay him so they started compliance intentional purposeful interference by the defendant that prevents the plaintiffs legitimate expectancy from writing into a valid business relationship there's absolutely no evidence of that in the record whatsoever intentional you know ference by principle in any way shape or form principal didn't have it out for mr foster principal it was just trying to do its job and comply with this contract the district court correctly granted summary the planets and and tasting the union there was warfare going on principle didn't know anybody about it but nevertheless there was no if you look at it there's no expectancy of mr foster continuing to represent these plans whether resigned or not but he did resign and he can't claim damages after he voluntarily resigned so the undisputed evidence shows that principle was not the proximate cause of any damage that mr foster suffered he was fully damage after july th twelve he turned out as i mentioned established any of the remaining elements that would entitle him to have a claim make out of claims against principal for tortious interference with prospective