could not be conferred on the court by stipulation by agreements how do we  let me make sure i understand your question since jurisdiction is a statutory matter here how do we counsel both agreed you recognize that you could not confer jurisdiction on this court yes ok so how do we have jurisdiction what allows us to have jurisdiction in this case think what i can say to that and i hope this satisfies you somewhat is that in my research i found it at least it appeared to me that there are many states where i don't i don't know i do appreciate your concern and i'm not sure how much i can give you on how that can be possible when a statute provides  which your feeling from i'm a little bit intrigued but perplexed you're saying that was a lot of states apparently have relaxed jurisdictional rules the pros the litigants isn't the law illinois the opposite yes and i deny and very clear about that in my brief because i don't want to appear to be trying to mislead anybody but the only argument i can offer up i wish i had i wish i had the only cases that were on my side the only argument i can offer in this scenario is is to is to try to impress the court that that there is that it's good public policy to to give we way to close a indigence for the same reason why they would be in any scenario where they were given leeway because they're not trained lawyers they don't have the same materials and where with all that  those that have attorneys and those are the pro se but you see that as being somewhat problematic in the operation of the court  based on this case yes yes i'm a little bit intrigued i'm perplexed counsel because i think you perhaps are overlooking what could be extensively your better argument is i understand that the claimants motion to vacate acknowledges that the notice went to the attorney burps yes that did not go to the claimant correct that is correct it may be a losing argument but isn't that at the time that this was delivered to her previous attorneys and that perhaps there could be a rule that we use about middle addresses actual notice maybe twenty days would you believe that the laws state of the decisional law that says notice that there are various notice to you why yes and the reason why i'm not arguing that you know that there was no relationship at that time was that as i understand am i understand the the kind of weight that my argument carries and that it's not a lot of weight  i say do say in my brief that i understand that we train the only cases go and for our last is ability to preserve this in case she has the opportunity to seek further review i you you're not arguing it's not you're saying basically we should depart from existing president and create the exception to the heretofore existing law is that in essence what you're asking us to do jurisdiction over this matter in getting to the points were raised by the justices here i think that the argument that the rules should be different for pro se indigent litigation might be stronger if she were the one who ultimately filed the writ she didn't take that time to go find a lawyer to do something she was unable to do she was able to do it she just didn't do it in time and she had twenty days she took twenty two as pointed out illinois the illinois supreme court has found that that's a strict standard you know there's no lax to be given to anybody and your point on the hardship on the point i think is a good one how much extra time does a coach say that i can get what if their representative the time notice was given here but then they become close say during that period how much does that affect how much extra time they get that's a slippery circuit court that's why the case was dismissed want to file a claim and so on the case was litigated before the arbitrator and then the commission and after the zero word and mr harris five attempted to