so the error that we believe was committed was that the court itself decided these disputed issues a decision which it is not permitted by statute to do but rather that it was a jury must do and so therefore what i'd like to acknowledgment does not bar the rileys of guillotines to present evidence to the contrary and in fact one of the cases which we started in our brief called fox to vs atriums involved a somewhat similar circumstance where  n there was an acknowledgment by an employee of having read and reviewed the contents of an employee handbook and the court ruled that that acknowledgment was not sufficient to bind the employee to of fact whereas the cases that i have reviewed the standard basically saying two things one you know is there a dispute as to whether or not there was an agreement to arbitrate and to is there some instances of discrepancy as to whether or not this missing page really was ever shown to the right only specifically the fact that there are different date stamps on the pages which they signed which do not appear  all of the other evidence that opposes the conclusion that he agreed to arbitrate so that that conflicting evidence by the summary judgment standard should be presented to the jury and decided by the jury in the context of section four  of is that the district court granted the motion to compel arbitration without giving them a jury trial on the issue of whether the arbitration clause w question is whether the dispute concerns questions or only legal question concerns no questions of fact or only legal questions so to that extent certainly does sound like a summary judgment standard but if there isn't any  there is no dispute they admit that they signed the arbitration agreement they admit that's their signatures they don't contend there was forgery fraud in the inducement or anything else they signed it and they had met they signed it right below a statement that says by signing  agreement i acknowledge i have read received and agreed to the pre dispute arbitration section of the agreement so that gets us back to the declaration which merely says that to the best of my knowledge and recollection i swear that that wasn't shown to me by virtue of their collective bargaining agreement provided them with health benefits with kaiser so the state had agreed to arbitration the party had never arbitration page they don't say i was i do remember seeing the notice that told me there was a three dispute arbitration and it was confusing to me or where is it or asked for it i didn't get it really of those other things they admit they signed it they disputed page was never shown to me or my wife i never saw it and i never agreed to it it does not contain my signature or my initial or my handwriting regarding me or my account or any identifying information pertaining to me or my wife experiments true for never said anything about waiving my right to a jury trial and never said anything about binding arbitration i never agreed to waive my right to a jury trial and never agreed to binding arbitration one of the pieces of evidence should all of been considered by the jury rather than the judge focusing solely on one piece of evidence and sank i'm going to decide this issue based on that court didn't decide any factual issue i believe that it  policy that isn't part of the agreement you already issue the issue it's only whether or not his assertion and her search and that the to the best of their knowledge they were not shown in one of the intervening pages back there is another to raise an issue of fact as to whether or not they're bound by that contract when they said we've seen it and we're bound by the perms of the agreement that calls for arbitration we were never shown the arbitration clause to disclose so on and at line thirteen it the court's order says the court rejects all of plaintiff's arguments and it goes on to say the signature appears  win and that's the only question and you get into all this issue about the state of texas just trash well i believe that the law does not solely hold that if you sign an acknowledgment you are are bound and that the court is not permitted to enter into