take fact that the case does not preclude one of the cases of the flieger and and the other nevada cases dealing with this process where the district attorney does take percentages of collection amounts that's not the purpose i was trying to figure out what a marker was that never actually seen one and it sounded like the words of a marker would be in places other than at nevada would be called a counter check just the words of a check now printed on the banks will use we're not we're not making that argument to this court we think that that is settled law in terms of the marker being the check we're not if you look like that after checks yes or they just say the date hated the order of  know so many dollars signed by so and so you know certain and there's also provisions under the law that allow to have the markers actually have that there are blanks and they have them filled in by the casino as a part of  was when there was a bankruptcy stay in effect yes they attempted to first collect on the marker and send out what we call the ten day letter from the biggest day of is there any reason why the wouldn't affect mark or the state doesn't affect the market with their initial letter was sent out before the bankruptcy was filed well with respect to anything that happened after the bankruptcy was filed why wouldn't there be exclusive jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court and what judge mary had ruled was that he believed that he did not have jurisdiction over the violation of the automatic stay and therefore believe that we would have what would be essentially called the civil extortion standing of the demand letter as far as i can tell there was nothing else that happened until after the bankruptcy was filed and it would seem to me that the only thing that would be available to you outside of the bankruptcy court would be an assertion that there was something wrong with that initial letter and what was wrong with that initial letter saying you essentially what we're talking about in the templeton case out of california dealing with the civil extortion it's what goes on prior to the time with the process is actually entered into california recognizes that part i believe under of the temple the law that is good case where process was used to file charges against an arthur not because he had committed a crime but because they wanted to have him resign from the police department that's the most recent case and nevada dealing with the tropicana used the threat of criminal prosecution to gain advantage in a civil debt obligation situation records in fact in my state arizona but i just statute says it has to be some type of criminal statute for that but we're not suing under the criminal statute or the citations that and what your honor is talking about in terms of the california arizona talks about those types of bad i'm sorry how is this different from a vast check how is this different from a bad check yes it was this different from someone who writes non sufficient instance you have a situation i don't believe it's common in other jurisdictions where the district attorney shares in the question of what would normally be restitution but what you have here is a situation where unlike the when case which was the criminal case there was not any money it was actually a closed accounts and the other cases that come before the market are usually don't have the situation where somebody is trying to file bankruptcy that's what makes dr carlin's case unique and why would an open any floodgates in terms of these types of cases challenging the collection practices of the barkers tell me if i've got this right proceedings in order to obtain payment of a debt and that would be not a bankruptcy issue but the civil tort of used of process   here in the sense that what they were trying to do was get dr carlin's to pay with the threat as well as giving him an artificial amount of time which they did not abide by which was not oh it's not asking them to pay the market that's the problem it's threatening him with criminal proceedings that's correct threatening him with criminal proceedings are going to be granted in nevada that's so even if the person really does owe the debt your honor that is correct and what they me ask you about about that this kind of caught my eye because although the rules of ethics seem to have changed when i was in practice the rule was wouldn't threaten somebody with them to tell the v a what he was doing that was a crime in order to obtain an advantage in a civil proceeding or you could get disbarred and that i think under alaska law  those are the elements just those two elements and that is that this applies where a policeman was charged with a crime to be stated in the complaint and with all inferences in favor of the plaintiff why doesn't it fit within these two nevada cases let me start by answering that question with the point that that is a claim for abuse of process not a claim for civil was not appealed but let me get directly to answering your question the reason that that this action that they describe accepting all the facts is true not your rise to a claim for abuse of process it is that because simply sending a letter to someone telling them that you are going to institute criminal proceedings against them for committing a crime and seeking restitution of that is not an improper purpose why not it looks like under this absolute knowledge that my i disagree completely think about what the he was being charged with a crime unrelated to his actions in order to get him to resign as a policeman the objective was to get him to resign here you have a bad check statute in nevada which you have i don't want to represent that you have them in guess phrased it that way the point here is what i'm making is when you commit the crime of passing an insufficient funds check which is what he did here right every merchant in the united states reports that for their local district attorney police unless you pay us well all i can answer in respect to that is the battle wall this is this is a common practice in nevada law it's the exact same thing that went on in the wind case and that years you give them notice to pay  point here is that it's not a crime to alert someone that they've committed a crime and ask them to pay what they owe and if they don't it's going to be referred to law enforcement i mean that happens with every merchant in the state of nevada every one of them i i have a question in assume for the purpose of my question there is a claim for events that occurred prior to the filing bankruptcy to the extent there is claim wouldn't be an asset of the bankruptcy of course it would be it would have to be it would have to be a claim that was listed and it would have to be something that was handled by the trustee in the bankruptcy proceedings and it would have to be assert litigated in the bankruptcy court anything that was prefer titian and anything that was post petition what the government cordingley this was the what they're complaining about here is prepare titian we didn't even get to that in front of the district court we would have had we gotten that far in the but we didn't even get to that point obviously because of the where we were at relative to twelve b six but responding back to the question about improper i think that the and if it's all theory or that's all they require yes but as you as i think you know we cited two cases to you one from the maryland court of appeals and one from let me double check so i don't want to miss louisiana court of appeals both of those court pointed out dealing with those state bad checks statutes which is what we're dealing with here it is not an ulterior purpose to hail to report someone to law enforcement to have them he not only didn't make it right he announced that he wasn't going to make good on it and so therefore it would refer to law enforcement over the defense attorney's office for prosecution and he was charged and he paid restitution in order to get the charges dismissed  simple this is a standard bad shape and bad check case there's nothing unique about this case that doesn't occur every day probably in every other jurisdiction about how bad check cases are prosecuted you have any i don't think that's right you know at least in my jurisdiction you don't go to jail you don't get threatened with jail unless you pay once it gets to the stage of jail you go to jail whether you put in jail unless you pay me yes that's what we say and we're not we don't say we're going to get you put in jail we say that we're going to refer you over to the district attorney's office for prosecution of the crime that you committed lust unless you make from everywhere the custom the custom in many places is the merchant says your check didn't clear when you come down or take care of it and if they don't get a response they send it to the d a but they never threaten if you have a person with well i can't i can't tell you that all i can tell you is you go to any business in the state of nevada and there's going to be a big sign there with a picture of the district attorney on it telling you that if you pass a check for insufficient funds you will be referred you'll be prosecuted to the max in which then a law that's correct is made every time you write a check let me ask a admitted only hypothetical question just simply addressed in nevada long right and here's the hypothetical situation there's a bookkeeper at a small business refer this to the district attorney for prosecution without the action of well under nevada law no it would not any more than anyone steals your car you say bring it back we're going to call the cops and bring it back you don't call the amazon natural treasures first just forty five thirty has been removed from the calendar after we have the other cases you want them to divide up your time so that multiple lawyers on the same side argue generic disclaimer is enough to violate the expectation of confidentiality and attorney client privilege petitioners had under california law helpful let me focus your attention on what's bothering me most in the