just gets more headlines because they have the resources generally to perform these kind of interventions but the legal basis for the present right of access is no different than in private citizens and that goes to the first amendment is our second basis deal basis for our standing is the usual stuff name and this is this is somewhat unique to the passage of this case as a record bears out you know this is a case between the physician suing the hospital over  oath in her deposition she not only testified their complaint was true fashion accurate but then she said i had no part in the hospital and i had the authority so she's taking two different positions now the problem for us is that plan is to be able to put forward evidence showing that she is taking this isn't positions to protect the integrity of our own nation if we can't do that because even more injured in this case then it directly effects us by the time that happens at trial it may be too late to pursue discovery as to other issues that are discovery in those cases in other words see jack to us from the clinic see documents from any other defendant why is it that you can't do that perhaps some misunderstand your question defense objects to your discovery based on an order in this case correct so that's what leaves us in this position where we can use our own discovery so we have to come here medical malpractise plaintiff in the center of a credentialing lawsuit which challenges peer reviewed conduct and the reason it's not a good idea is because we recognize first of all that that's exactly what the medical studies  he has sealed the record and the court history of the record based on medical studies that the individual that you talk about is not a member of the press the court has determined that the benefit of this is privileged information if you accept the argument that any person walking in the state of illinois has the same standing as does the press then saying any person can come in and look at this information that the judge can face in pleadings if you look at the magic complaint and very different in this situation there is access to the information an opportunity to have a review and if you're a member now playing your hypothetical that person were to come in and say i want to get this stuff if you look at the  if you're given the right to a hearing to even ask to get to see impounded documents then get only then does that medical studies and come into life question number one is do you have the right and in this circumstance the answer is  right to intervene do you think it's a two step process a two step process just two words if you have the right to intervene does that mean you get the records or do you have to show that you are otherwise title to them i think you would have to stay out of that your entire but the intervention request that they asked which the court denied was they said we wish to intervene and basically get choppy of each and every document that's there in your response to th is first of all you don't hear the concrete enough interest if you look at it they say that they have the right under the first amendment and the statutory right could go to that the second issue ok then the second issue is do they basically get the contents of not the kinds of this file with the same information from another place your position is then a defense to that is not that it was already sealed in another case right michael you