be represented if you can't represent itself it can't defend or prosecute an action absent counsel and that's you know that for corporations as the individuals the individuals in this case do simply with and i new form of a new newly signed collective bargaining agreement which couldn't come as any kind of surprise to anybody the last known address is were not control what happens in the federal litigation and he just let this one go for whatever the reason so why does not kind of just end it because that's all correct the district court would not  abuse its discretion in failing to let the default judgment of the the lower court did they said just the fact that they didn't give their address or which i think is important in march of two thousand and four even enterprised move to save money from their location three miles away to another business part of they dallas irrelevant if they're not represented  at that time they were represented your honor they will then then counsel counsel who may have goofed by not providing a correct address yes well he was still representing that time and he withdraw on march twenty ninth of that month and he the signed order after after that he didn't he signed a postal new address forty address for the corporation but he didn't change the individuals and that's that's that's that's true the court did forward it to the to individual tenants and it was returned and apparently they didn't send it to the corporation after april and the  that address was forwarded to his new address and he did receive those things but he never received anything and anything else about for the cooperation of the court so the postal scenes of yes i don't think he intentionally walked away i don't think he he didn't think there was any activity in the case because he didn't receive any notice about it or he received notice that he needed to find another lawyer to represent the corporation and really didn't do that rule they didn't follow it or they didn't know about it and if you can say that because that will then you can just serve a new amended complaint add things on to it to increase the amount of the complaint and not give them no is not correct that means that we then have to look to the efficacy of service by publication and on that issue my question is attempted to find a new address for these people could not locate them the court documents the court regular corresponds to these parties from the court clerk was returned under liberal the state secretary of state misrepresentation we strenuously object to any characterization of these parties or this attorney engaged in this representation of this court and then a complaint is based upon a new signed document that's an excerpt record third party complaint against the union a lot of litigation ended up to be dismissed so i took the made the decision that rather than merely introducing the whole issue again i would simply decline to represent the union with respect to do so and that's record and what was happening in the case that is not an abuse of discretion and that is clearly the standard that we are looking to to evaluate today  i do want to address the default judgment and if there are any further questions about that because it is a highly unusual methodology that we adopted we would prefer obviously to have the payroll records of a contributing employer these parties will come we uncooperative at no point have we had access to their payroll records in fact at every point of the post judgment proceedings they had an opportunity to come forward to clarify never did one thing that  calculated our judgment reconsideration the court correctly said that motions are are not favorably considered motions for reconsideration the fact is should be denied unless there are new facts or new law that was not available in the per motion obviously that did not apply and if you look at their motion they basically really argue the same same arguments over and over again how the third quarter has to do with a new set of arguments under rule sixty be and three they have the claims of excusable neglect of mistake and misrepresentation the court rejected that also after handle analyzing saying that they simply are regurgitat personal litigants who did not participate in attending pretrial conferences they did they simply disappeared from the participation of the case an eight hundred thousand dollars judgment was directed without and there was a lot of opportunity to appear and in fact the default judgment was based on the original complaint as well so it's very distinguishable from this case a point linking up to fifteen young and they used to test in young man hours which is the company that is different from ethan enterprises and even if it was from three years earlier also and in the dollars is too much of a sanction for just failing to give the earth rest unintentionally and that there was there was it didn't come anywhere near meeting the washington requirements for service of process look at which play to the core what you have and the funny thing is the how can we charge the trust with the knowledge person or the agent of the truck because he's a union manager but he's also a trustee as part of the fun he sits on the board of the