affected a disproportionate toll upon my clients ultimately as an example of that it was important to me to maintain magic as a viable defendant in this case nevertheless unlike the cases defense cases of al i believe it never occurred to me to suffer to allow war to cause this ultimate dismissal that occurred in this case as a means as i found in some of these other cases refer return to the importance of maintaining magic as an entity and then return to the to the dismissal in a moment it was important in my thinking to maintain magic as a person for two reasons one was on principle  that this proliferation of multi agency law enforcement association says proliferated nationally there were a couple of additional cases citing  circumstances here ourselves are quite different than those presented in al torquey and that case there was an individual who was found absolutely to have the knowledge ability and to have willfully chosen to fail to appear for both the pretrial conference and for trial at the time of the last of the underlying events if you will here i believe we were still forty five to sixty perhaps approximately days from trial in this case and on that topic with regard to the second of the that the rulings on the summary judgment have to be made before the scheduling conference took place and i don't think that that's necessarily accurate the court could have allowed the scheduling conference and the trial to remain scheduled as they were and proceeded with them and proceeded with the scheduling or rather the pretrial conference despite the fact that there might not have been a woman on the summary judgment at that time one of the available alternatives that i believe would have been available to the court was that if the court after the pretrial conference granted the summary judgment motions then to impose some form of sanction for the time that the defense would have spent needlessly at the pretrial conference a court also found that you know the difficulty that i had to put me back in one week from pain of sanctions which since the first time we did me or precluded the court from having that as an available option later but i think that the payment in full of those sanctions that have been first awarded and that i will add an afterthought i'm not so time i think the court is assuming one has to come back before the other and i don't think that's necessarily true i finally return for a moment to the importance of magic here as an entity one of the points that i did want to make like the jones versus williams case which is the case i remember as a young man in the iron case where a team of law enforcement officers searched the home later the homeowners found while ironing that there was a smell of urine but they could not prove which officers were back there and may have done it in this case presents a somewhat similar circumstance and that my clients were at each of the homes that were searched held in front rooms while officers searched the remainder of the homes and so my clients would have difficulty identifying any particular officer from a particular team as having perpetrated these events case you can't because you can't tell which one of the officers and does which one of the agencies involved instead of all of these searches were conducted under the auspices of the umbrella and the separate organizational structure  chain of command day to day supervision of magic that's why when combined with the difficulty of proof that i thought it important in this particular case to try and hold or try entity commission or a board constituted pursuant to the agreement here that you know you and the agency is authorized to do a number of acts including making in their contracts then it is a public entity essentially and that my intention is to address that first and to give the court to remind the court a little bit of the history of what goes on in the the appellants have not addressed really any of the numerous court violations and why there were court violations throughout the course of we went on for two years after that handling discovery without a motion for reconsideration ever being filed to a hundred or more depositions in a numerous times council would ask the appellant counsel about filing a motion for reconsideration and us another violation of the court order all parties agreed to seek a subsequent status conference to reconsider certain dates and at that status conference which was held on july fourteenth two thousand and four with  counsel for you time to comply with this order will result in dismissal of this action the thirty days comes and goes and no no attorney's fees are paid no request for an extension of time and nothing so that  pallies attorneys have filed a motion dispositive motions which are scheduled to be heard in about a week appellants attorney was now asking for more time to file an opposition that had just come up a day or two before the hearing and was again it was a  include a category of explanations for the attorneys problems or difficult appellant's counsel had filed something a day or two before the hearing and i i think these factors some of these factors may have been sent out i believe that the district court judge considered these factors in going through his evaluation process  those explanations are not set out in the district court judge's order the court also evaluated now the whether or not lesser sanctions would be appropriate and the court specifically said that the highest didn't comply before what would quite with a court think the plaintiff would comply now so in the course discretion deal with intergovernmental law enforcement associations like task force the task force is an association of law enforcement agencies not a joint powers authority which are set up for purposes of handling government issues such as providing a fun for excess liability coverage or for governmental agencies to join together to purchase property and that sort of thing there was no intent under government could section sixty five hundred to apply those sections to task force  in fact and we analyze the magic and in the cases of harvey and timberlake you see that magic is very very similar to having timberlake for example like harvey harvey had a formalized policy and procedure for conducting searches magic has its standard operating procedure the esto piece which counsel refers to like timberlake timberlake had a board of directors and a unique source of funding magic has a policy direction team magic could not be a person under nine hundred eighty three and yet have the power to contract to be recognized by the state of california by virtue of the gun graham as a as an entity capable of contracting it is beyond me