fold court here the decision oh oh the commission does discuss the arbitrator's decision in reviewing the three arguments today did you notice that your opponent evidently noted that you good morning your honour's daniel yergin on behalf of town and country distributors in the morning mr newland your honest before i begin i want to advise the court that i am suffering from a condition called conductive hearing loss and if against the manifest weight of the evidence the arbitrator well let me back up the petitioner had a condition he generated arthritis that was not caused by the work accident he degenerative arthritic condition in the hip the gentleman his middle aged a little bit older it's not uncommon to have generative changes in a body part and we just stuff in their brain and in this case pursued in a theory that the work they did but in a very tortured way and they disregarded the significant difference between a deep genitive arthritis and a condition of a vascular neck process and when they did so they took the repor of dr crane and changed the words around for me to talk make it sound like there were additional changes in the hip which were not present and as i pointed out in my brief dr crane's report discusses his treatment in february  dr slade back having achieved the maximum that a core improvement with regard to the hip he was back to work in a heavy duty capacity as a a delivery man of cases of beer to restaurants liquor stores and so on and he was not under any active medical care for his hip from the period of early january two thousand and eight until the end of february two thousand his injury his work activity in june in june of two thousand and seven did exacerbate his condition for a period of time it didn't aggravate it exacerbated as there's a difference in definitions of those words  change on x ray or a course of seven months he was stable the x ray from february two thousand and eight was not compared to the x rays from june two thousand and seven through january of two thousand and eight we don't know what document whether there's any change in that dr crane saw on that february two thousand and eight x ray we know from jane june two thousand and seven through january two thousand and eight there was no change per dr the initial treating orthopod on x ray you know it seems that all of this was presented to the commission the commission made of the terminations that it was provided with conflicting medical pinioned testimony  e that was proper and to deter to critical factors that page in the appendix of the initial brief at page a for in that appendix the commission decision reflects that dr slade and i cover seven two thousand and nine indicates he needed to have a hip replacement performed almost a year ago so now we're back october two thousand and eight when he's not under active medical care he's not seeing a doctor there's no evidence of record davy seeing a doctor and they're relying upon this stating the fact is slated that he needed a hip replacement almost a year ago and doctors slated hadn't seen him at that time for nine months when he had not seen a doctor for his hip of february twenty eighth two thousand and eight from dr crane through the primary care physician the commission says that he detected additional abnormalities in the right yeah that's not what dr crane's report sighs dr crane's letter of february ninth feb twenty eighth two thousand and eight says in addition x rays of the right hip revealed abnormalities consistent  contemplating surgery at that time he was under is the report indicates that he was on tour or he was back to work and his condition was not terribly symptomatic at that point and in fact he he would say that he said he may need a hip replacement in the future while i think you know if you listen to sports talk radio today the white sox are going to win the pennant this year on the white sox fan that would be wonderful but my chemistry related reading the feb again your honor there's no question or no issue i should say that there was an exacerbation he had pain in his head he had treatment he underwent physical therapy he had an injection in the right hip he returned to work  in a heavy duty capacity delivering beer going up and down the stairs he was discharged from care at maximum medical proof meant he had another condition in his right hip i'm sorry he ha t it is on treatment i would listen that is not so seated with the injury and it into his condition of building and correct and we're up here all the time in your you're fighting with are debating with us what manifest weight is why i'm telling you today this is manifest weight the commission decision is clearly against the manifest way to the things you arbitration the situation should be reinstated at and the circuit court thank you thank you counsel counsel you may reply replacement candidate even before he receives the prednisone so well with respect to the facts in this case we believe that the commission decision