so i tend to have points who aren't people on so in checking into this i spoke to a number of p r lawyers of the defense and the prosecution side by side and yeah that's what i learned that it is quite grout this was because it was verified by count when he got and because it didn't seek to appoint an era as a special representative or as he termed it as a bona fide special representative in doing so appellate has raised numerous issues about that motion none of which are supported by the record whether whether it was disclosed that she was employed offer or context was having with  he felt that it was improper to  was just plain wrong to one thousand a place has no limits on who must verify vote and have me ask you this question if we want to find that the first judge's ruling was and reasonable let's assume we want to fight that first judge's ruling was unreasonable is there anything in the record that will support that the only thing would be if this court were to determine that her view of the war was on reasonable and that one thirty seven sanctions are still to appropriate because there was no controlling authority at the time there's nothing now that indicated as much and it was improper for testimony of the attorney who signed the motion saying that he had reviewed the law and made a determination in good faith that this was the appropriate way burrell operating here you his opinion spotted that he thought this somehow some unfairness in the fact that the fended athlete if they had lost a trial would be subject to attorneys fees recovery but do you have to say about this procedure think you know that's not the first to judge roberts rule here that's a red herring that's been i mean this is a that it had to be somebody else he didn't say that she was the inappropriate person to be the special ministry he said she was the wrong person by a staffer because she verified the motion and the motion specifically said says that one of the parents entitle to participate in the estate i think one of the heirs has to moscow says shout the word shall verify the motion and that's not what happened he was there secretary it's actually a paralegal mystery and requests not personal system they used her to verify the motion and she had no knowledge of the operative x and that was contrary to the express language of section one thousand eight would it be the only way for us to appear here we'd have to find the action in the first judge should be and reasonable would that be correct no because what  this ruling was he doesn't say anything that the judge did below was wrong although your rule her order that that order well vacated by judge brown not expressly by implication of his ruling because was what clay versus hubby in two thousand and three first mr case he cited he said in his order here in the middle paragraph that there was a slew of other cases holding that are truly his representation of the deceased clients terminate with the clients that they still never come in and said who was the live human being that authorized this and judge brown the saying that this motion on its face is factually and legally effective but mostly factually acted because it purported to be brought in the name special representative give the verification they didn't even have an ear doing it that was part of what the judge found to be the insulation scheme trying to insulate their true client leave now admitted it we caught them and we found until they would explain who their client was authorized them to continue the force and they came up with the affidavits in arguments that they proper to this court that are part of the record that specifically says pacifically said we were authorized by one of behalf we acted but after saying back to the court in order to avoid the motion to bar them in the sanctions motion they said but that doesn't mean he's our right so there's this man tremendous tension here because they're acting with ou old friend henry to do this motion after the death of his father he needed to he must take him to because the statute says shall have to verify this motion someone else could have been the special representative but he had to verify that he was approving this special representative and that public policy argument that's very important here you can't have these attorneys and let's say let's say for the sake of argument it is a common practice to have somebody secretary but it's not com unquote the appointment shall be on verified motion of any party who appears in title to participate in the deceased state reciting the names of the last known the essence of all invalidated this motion it's not simply the fact that they were factually wrong dead wrong when they said they could represent a dead man and they said now comes the benny and the sign counsel undersize at the end after spouter died by authorizing that motion to be made in the courts in illinois and these lawyers acting on behalf of the doctor and filing the motion it's presley on his behalf to give him money under the contract because it's a breach of contract place that subjected him to the jurisdiction of the court mr greenspan stand up and argue why that's wrong and that decision should be upheld if i could get a minute or two to respond to that that's possible  brown he considered this case very carefully he worked on this case from two thousand and six and two thousand and twelve when he rendered his decision he took his time to read mountains of records and he wrote a very distinct order that saying a filing of this motion you know what maybe i'm wrong and maybe he's right but there was no controlling authority any time through now that said what counsel has argued in this court so we think one thirty seven it was verified it's what the appointment of a particular person as a special representative they objected to that motion in court they conceded that here it there's no record of what was said they either judge and she entered an order and the presumption is that she considered the motion and considered the appropriate factors and made a good faith determination that this is what the rule should be and i do remember if i didn't comment on this i mean what counsel spent a lot of time computing the integrity of the attorneys in this case i think is it really it just goes beyond the pale when he questions the integrity of judge mcdonald by suggesting that she never read a motion that the gentleman had died before that motion was presented that's why they wanted a special representative it was improper for just relf to effectively determine that she was wrong and then sanction