may please the court my name is richard and gino and i'm from harrisburg pennsylvania i've been representing mr and this is tucker now for almost seven years first of all  started representing them when they were being sued by interscope and death row and i represented him for about a year and a half there and then stands there with regard to the malicious prosecution case in terms of for one meeting that she had when she was meeting with her board of the national political congress of black women and children i invites him self there not there as a result of this one meeting mrs tucker somehow becomes the focus of litigation that goes on for years involves leavened depositions of this talker consuming twenty seven hundred pages of depositions it involves their hiring investigators to go into every aspect of her life it involves her name appearing in source magazine with a red line drawn through her name along with a lot of very well known black individuals so that what happens is when we're finally able to get in there and force them to drop this three year action and then we start like we had to do was first get of one drop to start the malicious prosecution action we go down the road of more depositions and years of time with everything being given on our side and nothing on theirs and we got no discovery they admit they have forty eight level in terms of everything here is dealing with legal issues because we're now at the appellate level so it's not the aspect of did i go to the judge from the magistra that if surely a matter of law and we're not looking at the technicality of did you actually file something with regard to this getting of these forty eight boxes of material so let's talk about something we have this is certainly a faction issue if you want to get down to this one isolated issue the first two letters are a letter to the tucker saying you owe a thousand dollars you also of this record later on when i write to get all of these documents verifying their chimes then you have a letter where he says here are our documents but not handling this on a pro bono basis the power of attorney which is on page one twenty of the record early shows the manner in which i don't handling this cases where they are responsible for all of the expense your honor as a matter of the simple as i understand the is eleven days of their positions in california boston new york attorney is going to california new york washington d c i'm not a hummingbird i can fly here at no cost obviously there is some cost when one goes from harrisburg to california to last and that all of these things incur every day i bring actions where there are medical bills it's not a question of whether those medical bills at the moment have been paid or not eight once you have a medical bill it's been prosecution suits or just favorite in the early special breed of sports teams and in those cases the damage is out of pocket expenses and there was no evidence before the court full of any how to talk expense lawsuits in this case and miss dr vigneault made no such connection either in his deposition the fact that we took the damages deposition of mrs tucker does not demonstrate that she had evidence in fact the reason we took that to questions and requests we made for damages evidence and the response was well yeah that's been mentioned me a number of times but i've just never gotten around to it all the time to get around to what was going to judge a motion filed in court below and they never did then in her deposition did she say anything about the fact that the thing underlying lawsuit was causing her difficulty stress well i think i don't recall exactly what she said in her deposition but my recollection is that it was on differentiated that she was talking about the stress that she had when she got specific she pinpointed to t and there's another there's a letter in the record that's a very peculiar letter where she says basically we're going to negotiate you in the midst of mr knight and not are going to negotiate a new distribution agreement to replace interscope question really is whether she was stressed by this time being brought against her and did it's hard to think that one would not be stressed or used to look in one is that in response to judge how this question i do not believe that the death threats and the ads and all the other things that she says of her stress that was the source for stress was the was source lawsuit and how much for well i think the answer is in summary judgment it was her burden to show that it was that there was a nexus to the lawsuit she never brought any of this information to the district cour the court with thousands of pages of articles deposition transcripts and relevant material without any depth depth or just a declaration from her saying that what about how about the and that was her burden on summary judgment followed and just as you said your honor i mean who would be stressed by eleven days of deposition i've never seen in my life live in the days of depositions one of the seven hundred pages