will reveal the numerous genuine issues of material fact namely what exactly happened in this on supervised classroom where marcus was left to play a rough physical some more information as to what exactly happened in that classroom the district did provide us with some of the discovery that consists of the incident reports of new currents and i don't think there's any dispute that those reports demonstrate that marcus was in a classroom playing some kind of game with other students and that there were no school personnel present when he fel of having a case dismissed because they weren't watching marcus and they don't have the school personnel there to see what happened there but the here is the kids have never been deposed they're minors obviously brings all sorts of delicate issues into the case and they should and these children must must constantly correct the complaint is not alleged that the defendants failed to act once they number one that there marcus was in this room unsupervised when this happened and that the lack of of supervision by the school was willful and wanton in light of the fact that they were aware that marcus it's these six prior occasions at the school they were told by the mother that he had a seizure disorder and they were told by the mother that here and as with the order to leave him on attended playing this game w the other students to watch him he is acting with another indifference to his see that lack of care resulted in a delay of the school knowing do which is if if you have facts that make it foreseeable that something bad is going to happen to a given student you you may have a different duty th correct correct and so to go back to just bridges question from before there there are collapse allegations and there are a host of less allegations and the allegations are that host collapse these teachers and administrators in the school were trained that they more often and this is right in the training and right in the complaint that if an employee encounters a child who is not breathing they have to it's a policy it's a protocol it's a pursuit or that they must take the media of lifesaving action without consulting with the supervisor our allegation is that here once fronted with this down student and the nurse does an examination and then says i think you're ok to keep playing marcus and he goes back in then and she didn't recognize something that's a medical negligence case essential in the and and what the is discovered that she has a fracture cervical fracture and that's exactly what the legislature intended to give me those types of cases where a student is evaluated or examined or school nurse just presented with something and decides i don't need to examine student but isn't your complaint then requiring them to make some kind of an examination of this young man when they come into the room our our yes and and what happened was so your honor is aware that the case was dismissed originally we were granted leave to amend the complaint and then and then the nd one was dismissed this was in nd yes allegation  to this family the procedures a lot of play a lot of discovery to allow for this case to proceed and all most of these cases will form kind of whether something rises to that or not is a true issue  quickly despite specific training that require them to do so in the event of a medical emergency and then my question is wouldn't it then why they are going to do something makes him a nation a diagnosis of what he was actually suffering from  well this is so obvious that this young man is fighting for his life and actually the difference i think it's by the nd district as well it's rather obvious that when someone is on the wrong grasping for breath struggling for their life there is a clear medical emergency and so you must do something to allow us th grade students simply die without doing anything at all is not what these cases want to happen schools so we think we're just to clarify i think what john just bridges is they asking is if they went in and gave them life they'd never making a medical decision fast they're immune under  bridge's hypothetical plays out and that a teacher tends to marcus and i making this up on the fly as you can tell but determines that this  coach or the teacher instructor had seen the student fall on her head a number of times she also complained of nasiriyah and headaches and number of times but he still chose not to take any sort of preventive action have her get an assessment to have her say hour and that's why the protocol really became an issue in that case that's not the situation here but this situation ears is different certainly but you have to protocols that tell you how to react in recommended her included a failure to follow protocol but it stated that that wasn't over wire and that that was just one consideration taken in to the fact of the number of other considerations that rose to the level of well one kind there well i think what you said was it doesn't create a duty but it's really there clear i mean the illinois supreme court and stewards and i quote that paragraph one of th yes i'm not sure i quite understand your question but if we if we advanced this case to trial in front of a cure if their failure to follow their protocol may be evidence in support of and so i'm not sure i quite understand this notion of hate duty jackson or which we talked about before so there's a real specifically a teacher's mere act of leaving children unsupervised will not be sufficient to establish will for one kind of rather point of my show that the teacher or school was aware or should have known that the absence of supervision posed a high probability of serious har a jury in this case listening to this of no one hundred percent then through on prior occasions at the school what the mother had told the school would would find that his conditions and leaving him alone in a safety we mentioned the stewart case as well in the stewart cases things like failing to administer in direct opposition to their standard operating procedures that if a young child is having some kind of allergic reaction that type of thing unjustifiable here long response time or an unjustified fire inadequate response to a known danger those those are the factors do not represent requirements the factors dollars and we know that we know we don't know that was that marcus was down for a period of time prior to him being discovered because we know that someone had to somehow notify the teachers and or administ weren't in the room those teachers or administrators had to understand what the notification was had to move down to the classroom so that we know that there is a period of time and that it's in excess of seven minutes that he la councils argument really demonstrates where i started which is there are a lot of questions and council testifies there a number of children have as way under siege with the seizure disorders that it's her opinion of this young man this day was suffering an asthma attack and stock of the seizure disorder that those six seizures have happened over six years there whoever responders must have made some kind of decision  and that cause of action must proceed according to all precedent in this in this court and courts across this so that when the evidence supports these allegations emergencies what the what they could or should have done in this instance what the other students observed what marcus what was happening to marcus and injuries in my opinion will find in favor of the pla