i was in communication with all the county prosecutor who was pursuing the dui criminal charge i've had numerous phone conversations with him i think you know conversations as well and i specifically asked in recent times during your he never figured out where we were told that he was drinking at home with his passenger was in the vehicle and here's the problem with the whole dram shop issue it was considered by the lower court when the the question is what were they pursuing at that point where they can see pursuing some potential claims against my law firm for potential legal malpractise what were they telling their point and that's the problem we have state farm from the adjuster we contacted right away we were told that there is only one hundred thousand dollars coverage given his nature and extent of his injuries at that time i knew that it was my duty to make sure that he could see all to get up front you say we took depositions we determine if there is some type of dram shop or further e t c claims that there's no evidence of any potential like all they out here at the outset of this is because it shows that you have one in this case has an uphill battle to be successful on this field because what the apple needs to do is convince this panel that was so nice and somehow someway affidavit to be completely lacking in credibility whatsoever in this is the key in another area judge who says i have to say that i'm frankly offended by what i see as a completely false statement with respect to the number of hours and claims to but also because of the testimony that i provided and the fact the judge who said eighteen years of experience and in defense in these types of cases he confirmed that what i was telling him it's true that this is an absurd contention that he would spend that much time guide to what constitutes unprofessional conduct and that such conduct does have some effect on attorneys fees and in some cases may be a complete are any judge who is took into consideration the fact that by this  he provide you with compensation and he didn't have to how is that under any stretch of the imagination and abuse of discretion is in the exercise of this his discretion he decided not to do that and actually provide compensation for mister thousand and seventeen he was concerned because he by his getting pushed to the suddenness of this case they had four hundred thousand dollars so it tells me i had a conversation with mr kaufman i use this or any other way that we can get compensation here's a one thing i do want to stress because i heard mr hoffman say this be claimed at least he did investigation into the dram shop and he spoke to the area safe from lake county l a county to handle this case was that henry county case that was a local this is important in in january january fourth two thousand eighteen there was or a hearing in lake county a motion to dismiss half of mr kaufman's filed last leading up to that my client sent him a series discovery yet so i don't have enough information to provide you to shoot to discuss anything more about the franchise in other words if he knew that the dram shop was one year rather than two years he's completely he's he's he's still meeting this ru court set up following an attorney's meeting is a creature of statute and as such the act must be strictly construed both past to establish in the lead and here's the important part and to the right of action for its enforcement they go on to say attorneys who do not whether or not there's other avenues of compensation and actively investigate that rule and then rule them out that's what we did that's what he failed to do that's why judge flues in this case found that that mr cochran was begin this is this is what we're talking about this is a mother hearing in this case they are bringing up items they have no bearing on just uses decisions and this is what has been going on all you want to call and the discussion about what was he failed to do in order to get a policy offer let's just make sure it was the right see farmer initially didn't offer the policy is he offered forty two thousand dollars seven months in the fees and costs associated with green as he'll you don't cite to any particular authority for why you should be allowed to collect fees there is a case the supreme court issued i believe in twenty eighteen called people x rays shader shod again would versus my pillow and corporate id and provided for attorney's fees the trial court did not grant attorney's fees and the supreme court took the case after justice ellis in the first district wrote a decision was quite eloquent and determined that well why it is since maybe a hundred miles since eight hundred fifty eight or thereabouts lawyers who represent themselves are not entitled to attorneys fees nor are pro se parties and title to attorneys fees you actually have to incur them so unless you have retained outside counsel will you please explain why your request asking for fees should be allowed we have other cases on calend