did later explain that what she means by that is in her mind reasonable recently careful standard means what the percent who physicians would do you know her because she solid evidence of the standard and in fact haven't you just said that she did although she she was led with questions about knowledge and care and reasonableness and answered yes blue cross blue shield for payment and that's three hundred fifty eight thousand seven hundred twelve dollars that is the amount of the in medical bills the plaintiffs submitted to cross blue shield saying hey this admitted it's a big error here the difference between the three fifty and the one thirty four is almost two hundred twenty five thousand dollars that's the gross amount of we're talking about the  legal entity but he's doing the stranger whoever that person is doing it's not behalf of some persons or some other people who are involved in it isn't the primary on the name did minister here he's the beneficiary of this particular estate i don't think that's true but your honor i don't think that the ministry here is doing more for the benefit of the beneficiaries i think it's an should have been discovered earlier and your argument was well be tried but we found out that needed there was some improper direction to blue cross blue shield you know kind of  seeking recovery of one hundred four hundred thirty four thousand dollars that was a true blue cross blue shield sells that room seeking eighty nine thousand dollars in sort of what was presented as important at a time is a one page of the health plan the legal definition you know if you were to probably poll one hundred experts who have testified here in the state of illinois you ask them individually you know what your definition standard of here very few of them would rattle off standard of care and even reaching my opinions in this case i apply that standard of care where does the eighty percent come from that she reference what what is there a particular issue and i didn't show her the instruction obviously diaster in looking at the issues in this case when assessing the standard of care did you apply the degree of care knowledge and skill that a reasonably careful family practice physician would use in chicago in two thousand and one unlike or some circumstances that yes and then she said the standard of care should be the same wherever correct are you familiar with the standard of care and she said i believe the standard of arguing with the standard of care for reasonably careful family practice suspicion is that standard existed in chicago with the year two thousand and one i believe that the standard of care is the same in chicago as it is in the rest of the united states or board certification is national and it is a national standard of care so yes yes thousand and one do you understand i understand did she refer to the percent in your examination or was it in cross examination another that was read to the court no she did not and then there was cross examination on that practice where i believe you can see there are fifteen hundred twenty five hundred patients a significant percentage of those were general family practice patients she's board certified there was no objection that she wasn't qualified by by background training or experience to offer the opinions that she did infirmities in the construction of stuff had to do with the removal of the two thousand and six version of that degree of care knowledge and skill which is included in this particular structure also one of the was whether or not there was an improper emphasis on the evidence of that expert witness testimony in the study of structure as well here that's not an issue because the only evidence in front of the jury the expert witness testimony and the instruction only said you must rely on the testimony provided by expert witnesses that you've heard here i affected if i could if the case really go to trial today  and the two thousand and eleven version of one of the five or one were to be used which is what were instructed to use it would contain the words reasonably careful again in two thousand  actions of a professional that it is that degree of care knowledge and skill that a reasonably careful professional with use in the same or similar circumstances give them the state of the standard at the time of the  and if if if there were going to say you get a reduction to the extent of the amount that the health care provider is entitle to recover i would suggest that the that the the statute would read such reduction we've paid if you read if you or any legal representative recovered that that's what the plan language says that's the agreement that charles perking and all the people who benefited from his health insurance representative are were able to obtain they would argue that they are entitle to be sent off greater than the amount that was actually recovered at the time of trial that would be the earth which which can't be the way this statute is applied we be able to benefit from a contract to a relationship where my client obtained health insurance which cover him and his wife nor should we be able to evade that contract and say well for purposes of the legal case benefit from reduction it will be in pursuit of the common ground up which which to which induction exists based upon whether the creation of the form by the plaintiffs they want to benefit from that as well so three hundred eleven thousand bodies ali i mean his is he submitted all the bills but requested a certain amount isn't that correct he didn't request three get the bills were submitted but he requested three hundred and eleven thousand and that's what he that time to obtain the information so i think he's quite right there was no subpoena but other informal efforts were made i believe  we're trying to roll races but i think we're going to complex but the interesting point is that each of the arguments even now the basic amounts three hundred thousand dollars which is right it's in it's in our ballpark