it is pretty much the same as what it was before that date and the reason i did that is simply because all the cases that i've cited are three january one two thousand and sixteen they did put me on any and codified that's what we've already been doing in other cases so ok here it is and that deals with the issue of the free school whatever that meant back in eight hundred sixty eight and what it is today and of course the argument that i make over that is that essentially the child actually have a free ride for two years every community college and that is in my opinion fall within the definition of a free school and there is a more recent case that i cited in my brief that says ok you look at affordability and i know mr guy sure has argued against my position saying it is not always the cheapest do that is the past alternative i agree with that and i don't think just because in this day and age there is a free school you have to go to it the hash to be some reason for all over if you look at history should the school need the additional cost regional to under the circumstances or two more expensive school is necessary or more appropriate for the child and i think that's an appropriate standard and i think it's an appropriate standard in th transferability of credits obtained at richland to the university of illinois so you can to attend virtually community college and know that your credit hours are going to transfer power per hour grape are great over to the  as an exhibit of used in the trial court so that that that was our proposal to spend a year or two that the what i was looking at it terms of special attributes that makes this more important the only two that are cited by mr geysers one being a four year school is somehow beneficial but there was no real evidence on that i guess maybe we can assume that being a four year school or living on campus might be beneficial but i'm not sure how that would compare to being two years on sides there are the school was going in food science day that there are seven required food science courses that have to be taken the first two years and my required to show benefit special benefit to justify the difference in cost we're talking sixty eight thousand dollars in a two year period which could have been absolutely free and if they applied for the scholarship it was  two thousand dollars per year but this third and fourth year that could be used in any other public state school now after the first two years my clients have be happy to divide this  or in those photos or even in general or both or in general yeah i think that all of the cases basically say if someone makes up their mind that they're going to a particular shool that you really if you got a part of the decision making in english case my client was not that is part of the record you're stuck with provided that you can in the other thing the second factor that the more expensive school is necessary or more appropriate for the child that's pretty broad but i do know that judge choreo mention that the child had worked hard had good grades and seemed to really put a lot of stock in the fact that this child wanted to go there it just say so you're saying that evidence just wasn't there know i believe that both parties agree that she was a good student warrensburg high school that she was in the upper at least quarter of the question or she was in the upper ten percent of the classroom don't think anybody questioned the fact that the young lady would write i have attended to or education he did question however whether this is what she really wanted to do we haven't we yet he cited a number of instances where she was going to go i think you are school in chicago or them someplace else a different curriculum and that perhaps it would be better to try to figure out if this is really what she wanted to do likewise she had some ability to work internships investigated with a and she did none of that and if this were truly or interest in something we're going to spend the hundred thirty thousand dollars doing in four years they would better find that out but i hope down getting close to answering your question now as far as the u of i or sitting in at the university of illinois i can only relate back to when i was an undergraduate and when an honors three hundred fifty people in this room i'm not sure that i'm getting any better education and then going to richmond community college in that type of  after no investigation and which one community college which is what i what i'm saying here is where ok she said that just because she said it doesn't make it so where is the google search that would tell us that this is the way that it came in on i don't believe there was an objection to it but the cross examination was did you do an investigation of richland community college and the answer was in family no and so you don't know whether they offer these courses or not and so yes i i think the evidence is there it gets close to the what is the weight that you put out and you're saying what you should know given it anyway in my opinion no but balance that against what are you going to have to borrow in terms of money what are you going to shell in student loans for the student him the parents of ford which is one of them which is primarily one of the issues in section five thirteen affordability and you're supposed to look at head testimony about could he not attempt the u i in the summer months and obtain these food science requirement that we have any number of alternatives that were possible to get forty seven years old and the effect of taking on this debt would prevent him from retiring or was there additional evidence presented that put show yes he had to take on this additional debt that it would push back his retirement by x number of years and other words was there specific evidence regarding the impact on retirement other than the statement that he says i'm not going to be able to retire  pie the only other information financial information we get we got into was he would have to borrow the money he only he had no at what he and his house if he was saddled with an  or paying that debt that where he is already just a breakeven financial situation would literally prevent him from putting money back to retirement i want to back up a little bit  looking at the standard of review here and if you sit discretion that's a very high high standard to meet in so it seems that we really have to start from the point out your position being that resume was a preschool and you have this case that talks about that but is it really free in considering the standard of review although we might disagree here may have differently scholarship yes which would pay up to two thousand dollars per year the parties agreed that the range of her caution trash rotation all of the rest of it was somewhere between thirty three hundred and thirty seven hundred for the two year period so with the other shower ship which i now have a disclosure to make here our daughter's at richland and say trustee scholarship and so i have a little knowledge about this this year scholarship pays an additional two thousand dollars per semester once you transfer to a public school after you finish at which the the evolution was in the courtroom and i have no independent knowledge of a judge unfortunately like you i don't was that it would pay for up to another two years of public knowledge another two thousand dollars i thought or year i didn't think i was  saying that you presented evidence that the sheer scholarship put pay for her books and fees at richland yes i think that's in the record i may be wrong about that but that's what please or we start off the proposition that the division of the educational expenses here with one third one third one third which seems to me that that brings with look after well what about their relative incomes and the father's income was ninety four thousand dollars a year plus his the a disability which was another eight thousand dollars or so but as mr hopkins is stated it is correct that on the child reaching the age of eighteen in v a benefits were reduced but you still earning ninety four thousand dollars a year were as the mother was earning seventy four thousand dollars a year having the same obligation and the child really having a very modest income whatsoever no comparison whatsoever and yet the child was accepting the same responsibilities all the child was going to have morals and money pay her share was testimony in the transcript about the parents plus loan program were each of the parents could borrow their share so my suggestion is in in my position is is that he did the is the ability to obtain a home to finance it i think that that's one of the possible yes that's that's one of the possible avenues of getting money i don't think that you have to have the money in your pocket some some parents are going to save the money up and they are going to have the money but some of the parents are not and so what happens is they have to go out and borrow the money but i think when you're working on a full time basis and you're you know in your forty's certainly you have that ability i mean it's not as if this obligation just suddenly pops on the scene it's an it's an obligation that obviously was forthcoming and he acknowledges that he didn't have any problem with that division with regards to the third and fourth years he was offered his a direction is really about the thinks that the child should have gone to richmond and yet he admitted on cross examination that he had suggested that the child look into the university of florida the the difference between the child going to richland and the child going to the university of illinois is more than just simply that the university of illinois is a more prestigious place to go to school it is the fact that this trial this student was going into the food science program which is a very specialized program  part of the exhibits included the courses that the child would have to take you have to complete one hundred thirty hours within the four years and if you follow the university of illinois curriculum the last two years they're going to have you taking essentially all food science programs and you have to take seven food science programs in the first two years the testimony the mother was well sure the child would only be taken general education course so yes general  education courses my transfer within the child still have the obligation to take seven courses and it was our position and it was a position adopted by the court well if that's the case then this trial is going to end up having to go three years to the general education courses at richland are still here i think because i think on direct examination she testified that that was all that the child would be able to take and then i think on cross examination the op did ask a question something along the testimony and admitted by by the father was that this child stood in a position to earn it according to his position sixty four thousand dollars a year median income upon  graduation my question of him was isn't it true that the median income for food science graduates one hundred two thousand dollars he said not the sixty four thousand and the position adopted by the trial court was that this is a child that stands in a position to have a very serious income on graduating and for the child to be deprived of going directly into that have to go yet another year of undergrad school is doesn't make sense going to a private community a private school in indianapolis and ct divided the expanse up one third one third one third based upon the private school in indianapolis and on  after appeal sent back that the that the division should be based on the less expensive school because there was no basis to believe that one school is better than the other it was apple versus apple in this case we don't have the apple vs half in this case we have the university of illinois which is one of the top fifteen food science programs in the entire united states compared to going to originally community college we believe that the basis of the court adopting that was sufficient because the child we think they haven't established the child was only able to take seven courses but aside from that i think is the second basis it is that the university of illinois by putting the child there in that particular program and being exposed to that environment and those instructors gave the child a better education made the child better qualified to go out and compete in that have particular chosen field so i think the court had the ability to to look at both of the two options and the court did and the court followed the suggestion of the the mother and the child and i think at this point it is not an abuse of discretion for the position that ok thank you is there a kidney issue involving short jury another hospital stay projected running a hundred sixty seven negative deficit he said i make that up with my tax refund every year i get money that i put back and then i can pay the bill now that the idea is your point well if you have the ability to borrow money do you have to go out and do it ok i had a lot of people when i was in practice and still doing bankruptcy that thought that was a wonderful idea and then i did their bankruptc he going to pay this back there's got to be a payment for that parent plus loan where is it in his budget it's not in the last specifically says you've got to consider that and i don't see it i don't even know how he's going to do it with the third fourth year but that if you spend the first two years you buy you can be better off with taking college classes of russia i don't see any factual support that either my client did make the statement maybe you ought to consider the university of florida