teacher who is doing her job where the as you sure you read in the briefs is in a circumstance that is not that the general public this is a lady who is teaching a class she was at the end of the day of the school day that was very difficult there was somebody in the morning she was dealing with children who were u sed to having homeroom at the end of the day it's a friday their seventh graders at the end of the year some with newly found hormones they're always ready to through and they it's a social hour at that time but this time we have a class we have a group of students who are well as miss margaret said we're active i think that was the nice thing that we nice way to put it as a teacher they were talking she had an assignment to give to them she was concentrating with that and the children she was walking around a  desk this is a lady who was who had a brace on there was new fluffier carpeting and as a result of her concentration and coming around and trying to get closer to the children she had a fall the point of law that we're obviously looking at is whether a neutral risk that was described in this case has said let me interrupt you just for a moment here  testified to as to the condition of the carpeting there's nothing in the record that changes anything about the mood of the classroom there's nothing that indicates that anything that she said n fluffier carpeting there's no question about that she has cancer trading and what she is doing she has a book on the table she is looking at the book she is looking at the children she's coming around the das she has sixteen kids spread across the room she testified she's trying to maintain eye contact trying to see them back but that's a normal part of any teacher did she testified that there was something going on in the classroom that distracted her or she was responding to some student behavior because her default which is in the cases you cited would a little bit different here is the average twitter found just walking across a carpet at a place of work well i cases that cite those requirements is that she was performing some work related task which contributes to the risk of falling what was this is the task the task was being in the situation where she had there were tank constraints she was watching the children she's coming around she's trying to and she has a classroom with twenty four desks i don't we don't know where the children are all w and she's trying to maintain eye contact trying to talk to them is this any different than coming down the stairs and having a child come up to ask her a question and distract her and she falls on the stairs we have a myriad of steps because there's that you're saying  different in all of those instances that was some thing going add and relative to the student's movements needing behavioral you know going to do something because of the the students are interacting with the students are here you're saying what he's looking at the students is going around the dance well the students weren't doing anything that caused her distracted or we're going to nest they were and that's the proof the the and that th be other than sitting in their tears were they doing that specifically district that they were talking they were packing their goods they were she was trying to keep contact with them they were it was a a situation where these were kids who were not distraction i look at more special that this perfect storm that we have where all of these things that are going down to where she's coming around and talking to the children and trying to move closer she testified she's even trying to move closer to she didn't testify that she testified she fell while she was doing this if that's an inference then that's you know that would be correct and it would be certainly a weakness but i think that what she has described and the number of things that were going on at the time is certainly not something you would expect from someone in the general public it's not a risk that someone would have it's not walking across the floor it's not going to crush your living room this is trying to maintain situation was not the way it was if you were just coming across the desk and of self love your parent but i still be standing here today arguing your answer if you would be the answer as i probably would but the fact is that there's a lot more than that this the how is this different did any of you seem to be elevating the fact that she's talking to the students what else can you do in a climate wouldn't you always be looking at your students you don't always have the same situation with students you don't always have the end of a friday or a friday where the kids were not social with not able to socialize their packing their goods and this is a teacher that's being conscientious trying to do her job big kids are worse than usual she it's one where the schedule of classrooms or time is short and choose not to she usually does not give homework she's trying to finish before the last three or four minutes or whatever the amount of time is before the bell rings she is pressured she is doing something that is other than what the general public we do and it's not so much what a teacher would be doing or not doing but what she won a member of the general public be doing what she is doing trying to maintain the i pad tag trying saying you take different routes but you wind up at the same locational no reasonable person i don't think so i think that when i think when you compare it to what the general public would do walking across the carpet you have a far greater circumstance and you know are bigger risks they have to fall it's against it's likely walking down the staircase everybody doesn't walk down the stairs carrying a person a coke can fall down the stairs we have cases where these else that was related to the employment she returns to fight she was distracted she just said what was going on she testified that she was acting in a way that big because of the way the classroom was she was becomes when he gets more basic in my always districted from my ability to walk every time i'm trying to maintain eye contact with somebody sometimes i am and sometimes i'm not so the question becomes what in the evidence in this record allows ours to say that no reasonable man could come to any inference other than the fact that she was district what's in the record is a set of circumstances i believe the proper is that there were distractions going on which was more than with someone in the general public with you again no more than any of the staircase you know you people walk up and down the stairs and they don't fall people but but these disparate distraction was exceptional it was greater even for a teacher to be doing what she was doing because of the unusual circumstances of the day  ancillary issues and don't focus on what i think the court focused on what the archer focused on what the commission focused on the focus on what the actual actions were of the employee she testified she was walking at a normal pace she desk to restrain his or because kids were fighting or because kids were acting outrageous she was one here around her desk at a normal pace she was walking on industrial carpet i think a lot of things made about the fluffy carpet it was my own testimony by everyone's condition of the kids at the time in the classroom i think all of those are not really causative factors she didn't say there are causative factors no one says or causative factors the average trader looked at all those facts they were all raised she testified to them the arbitrator considered all those commission considered of employment with the with the school district i think it's as simple as that and if you look at the cases that council sizes briefs those are all extend make circumstances which are much different than the case that bars today very comforting responding to the student in praise there's other inputs that we may perhaps her foot caught off each other perhaps or brace was weakened on one side if you've been wearing for a while there's impetus as they could be made but there's no evidence that the inference is made and drawn from the evidence by the arbitrator and by the commissioner france as part of the brace or anything like that that would be a personal risk and i think the commission had made that inference that would be in the decision as opposed to saying that this is a neutral risk as far as the describing the kids as very talkative very animated they wanted to go for the weekend they were ready to be out of school there was talking there were murmurs and i was trying to make sure i had their full attention while i was explaining the homework that i was explaining as more talkative