had taken the position that it actually filed motions to this extent and have said that they were entitled to need taken the position consistently up until that point that we're here today in this appeal that they were entitled to automatic interest and then i wouldn't i respect your opinion but still i disagree i think that i am just setting reasonable interest on this not judgement interest this is not not a judgment on the money it has not gone to that step yet which it could perhaps proceed accordingly you know what did happen was they did take the position and they had filed motions to try and obtain a judgment to get the special interest which they subsequently dropped they never actually prosecuted one of those two  she could have done it then i agree but she didn't know how long this was going to take she didn't know what the result would be and so why can't she wait until she knows how long it's going to be and she knows with the result this well i think that's a good question just look i'd say for a number of reasons st of all had to pay the judgment he had to pay the judgment and then before the judgment before we ended up your appeal what happened was there was there were two notice of appeal the file and then we have filed a bond motion judge want to redo the whole thing so we proceeded out of that motion but he posted that bond within the time that was required and i think you know one thing that i want to get back to the st part of your question here is you're saying well you know he could have paid this often when the interest but what interest i mean notions of due process is that people should be able to to be able to see what their obligations might be in a situation like situations like this because if you're true that situation and the legal issue of florida having to the husband in that situation could know hey this is going to be my obligation if i don't pay these things and i think that that's the better way and that in my can't no obligation if this court found that he didn't know my point three million already there for doing this you know finley says you can do it but i would have and submit if that's the case that it should be done within the context of the judgment to give the judgment debtor the opportunity and noticed to be able to you disagree what you're saying here is that it wasn't a final judgment because there was never a declaratory statement as to what the amount of the interest was supposed to be you're taking it as a negative pregnant and assuming that since there was never a great discuss even though there was a discussion about the fact that there needs to be two hundred dollars or x amount of dollars because there's going to be interest or there could very well be a wrist and you put up a bottom to make sure that supposedly it was going to cover the isn't resolved as you claim and now ray shooting caught up applies then theoretically it would seem to me logically at least that it was never a final judgment because it was never either granted or denied it was neither sat nor not se so therefore it wasn't an appealable order those are that's not what i'm saying what i'm suggesting here is they had an opportunity to ask that the white white anything matrimonial litigant has an opportunity to ask for certain things they can they were denied that they couldn't prosecute they haven't even wanted to but until such time as the issue was resolved as to whether or not there was or wasn't going to be interest on a non money judgment that wasn't a final w theory that they quote unquote were given they were given an alternative relief or an alternative remedy by the trial court and the trial court's ruling as to whether or not there was going to be a bind whether the fine was going to be for x amount of dollars the five million three hundred thousand dollars or whether it's going to be for clear is a resolution of the entire issue of interest and therefore if there isn't an entire resolution it's not a final word and if it's not a final order we shouldn't entertain the appeal so either we were right then and you're wrong now or you were wrong then and maybe you're even wrong now well judge i was right and maybe you are right now and maybe we should demand it back we should make it the judgment and we should have the judge declare what the amount of interest is the rate the length of time the amount of bond and then it can come back up here and we can play the appeal game on your five million three hundred thousand property settlement to go all over again i believe that it was a final order and i believe and how did it how did the court make a declaration of definitive judgment as to whether or not interest was allowed or the judge didn't make definitive be that you define a judge or the fact that they didn't know it doesn't work that way there are at least three verdicts guilty innocent and not proven and the thing is in this instance this is not proven you haven't proven the negative all you proven who says that the relief they requested was the night you haven't established that the other relief that she was talking about the trial court was talking about was granted or denied and there's evidence in the record that indicated that she contemplated grant there's nothing in the record indicate that she adjudicated whether or not there was going to be interest on a non money judgment and if there was interest whether it's going to be granted or denied in the rate and the length of time etc so until  entered it's not a final judgment because those issues were still before the court or are you claiming they weren't before the court because if you are you're claiming that your argument that it wasn't a money judgment wasn't made because apparently she ruled on that issue didn't she that she will that which particular she ruled on your claim that it wasn't a money judgment and therefore nine percent wasn't of clickable and therefore the next or counteroffer was  to apply some sort of interest because it's a nine when he judgment with the judge i also said that she was waiting for some sort of i read you got home and if she's waiting for it doesn't have means she hasn't made a definitive judgment yet at that point that was prior to the entry of her amount of the appeal mind to disappoint a court as you have i believe the right under the rules to seek either a reduction or in the event of honest tonight in the trial to seek a bond in this court based  you will have the opportunity to make a model discretionary versus reasonable i'm sorry discretionary reasonable interest versus mandatory as you noted which was requested by suzanne struck counsel and the court had a hearing on it the court had a ruling on it and actually ruled in the appellate favor in regards t interest would be included in the fine to have already anticipated injuries but six and a half percent for twelve months with these civic understanding that the appeal the last water keeping that issue open and so is that your position opened up by offering interest to argue that there was never a hearing i'm interested in this crazy you know the the argument came on from suzanne's counsel seeking maybe twenty nine percent interest to judge her argument i went back and yes that's what she said that's she stated in april that's how i came up with my ruling it's a number to get you had given him like a two day hearing alternately on the issue of interest because there were all sorts of experts about what could be invested or know him there was a there were there was there was a motion filed on interest based on the objection that appellant had on any of the amounts of the work being distributed suzanne which was contained in the letter of credit  interests mandatory or expression or the judge called it reasonable that doesn't take away from the fact that she was awarded discretionary interest so again just to move into that the judge said very clearly on page twelve of the st nd hearing i am looking at a reasonable interest no judge not judge with interest but i do agree some interest needs to be awarded and that was the context under which she made the finding that would be reasonable interest of interest at six and a half percent in the way she came up with the final or just the take that same six and a half percent over twelve months and extended over the twenty seven months during which the hell are you now we have no access to that money pretty clearly says in the five million five hundred thousand it was a reasonable position for him to take i'm looking at going a little bit higher than that based upon that interest you know is so low right now why would she just say i'm i'm looking at six point that figure that mr grant's needed and he says something and then mr rosenthal says something and when she finds out that the number isn't about two hundred thousand that's when she says well i was thinking of going higher but she still doesn't say doesn't it make some sense that to get i now use in this case took some time to get this case finished she would she would say that at that point where she should wrong you're doing you're hearing the question of discretionary interest by me the question of this discretionary interest was never raised commented on or even hinted at by either party or the court before entry of final judgment is modif reconsideration in other words there was no personal deliberation decision in judgment much less explicit ruling whatsoever by the trial court on the issue of discretionary interest that's the argument that's that's from the opening brief on page thirty three dollars that's the indicate was offered what the buy was offer and he of the trial court later on has said by the way if you don't pay the judge a bit off at that percentage rate then i'm going to enter judgment on the amount and it will be the statutory r am i correct in thinking that mr clement was correct when he said that his client asked for the liquidation and the payment of the fine over to his client and you have your client object