does the agricultural exemption of the workers compact apply to this case and this particular fact or were mr hagen was hired by the employer mr sherman to drive a truck for him and was injured during the performance of his job but he never actually set foot on the farm and it's actually possible that none of the grain that mr hickman hold for mr sherman was actually produced on that farm on the connection to the farm is tenuous at best do is it is it i would that make a difference i would suggest to wharton i mean maybe if all of the green he was following definitely came from a sherman car i think mr sherman i have a better argument that that was farm work that mr hickman was performing but he was hired to be a calling his green he was hauling green from mainly the mendota facility to other facilities and vice versa and the the frustrating part about this case is the work mr bacon was doing made so little of it if any was actually tied to the farm it's our position that mr sherman was just hiding behind a small family farm exemption of section three of the act he has a very distinct point is there a certain is he outside of i think you need again to look at the facts of the case and see what is in a farm hand through his working hauling grain there's a guy who was just hired to be a truck driver but back to this case though but i don't think that's important i mean maybe even i guess it could be if he was being like you know five dollars a day to help out a friend but if this was his main source of income during that time he was hired to be a truck driver and he worked as a truck driver writer for mil to net transporting grain from the family farm or to the family farm yes that's exactly what i'm saying is i think if he was hauling grain from the sherman family farm to the mill then the exemption would apply and we would even be here but in the off season when he wasn't doing the farming he was doing the trucking he hired mr brakeman he was injured while working as a trucker so your interpretation of the she actually used the phrase  and i was going to ask this question what would be the result of my clamor in a council who worked for an accounting firm here in downtown chicago whose only client was the farm with the agriculture exemption still play i would say no because if you look at the type of work that's being performed on just as the case law does and just as late as the legislature did in drafting the act they intended for certain types of work to be covered such as trucking mining construction certain beauty shops were house etc that's all found in section three  week my next my next question is going to the truckers be hauling electric fences which are used on a farm or mining for a line which is used on a farm or what if the farmer owned of meat locker and there's a butcher working there he slices hand off i mean just because the farmer omens just because the owner of the the trucking company hauling electric fences or mining for lying a more the meat locker just because he owns a farm would he not be held saying it's the nature of the would be performed by the injured employee at the time he's injured it's not a trauma factor it's what what evidently is he hired to do want to generalize the base and i suppose that's more accurate the first one was before the commission and it related to lack of subject matter jurisdiction by virtue about haitian of section three sub nineteen of the workers comp act and that would be with been bantered around as do small family farm exception which doesn't mention family farms in any way shape or form and that's one thing i want to just sort of lead off with i think the version that your honor was was questioning about to some degree is the  our country place or form of farming including a culture which would be you know well beyond what we traditionally think of the traditional i think of as a form of self include fisheries i'm putting less than four hundred working days agricultural are proportional labor per quarter during the preceding calendar year there's no issue whatsoever that my client employed more than four hundred working days of agriculture which there's no question that his farming operation fell within the scope limitations even if you included all of the so called trucking employees all of whom were actually independent contractor who believes in issues or trucking business neighbor culture one prefer to see to a corporation parking or unified farming operation had to throw in a price because that was that employees attorney figured out early on that if this is all one enterprise he was out of the box by virtue of the  that was that the buying your corn seed sales were done out of a building that was part of the for the truck was used for both thing for use of part of the firm or your opponent makes an argument to his some superficial logical appeal that some just because someone owns a farm there's an exemption applying your respect to what they have the employees doing the think about well there's there's some the focus and i believe there's a brain farming operation ok so if you have a somebody engaging in trucking deliveries who never sets foot on the farm we never takes anything from the farm we never delivers anything to the farm what does that have to do with the agricultural and or print the sitting in the fields waiting for his brain truck to get filled up with great four to go there but the trucks that are only leased by now by my client are used are used and one part of the here very combine but if the only thing that i'm doing is falling green from one bring the leader to the other would you suggest that they were cultural enterprise opposed to just the trucking business because because you're on because it's gr and in large part that that certainly is helpful fact in this case it would be more money different was a different product other than being the product that is exactly in my client's business name sherman brain farms their grain farm the grain goes from the combine to the truck to the elevator back and forth between elevators to barges and then gets shipped off to transport and and agricultural employee includes those employee he's who are moving their grain in the stream of would be all of those truckers who to see an eighty ninety four hour and twenty six around twenty who are calling these huge trucks loaded with law are loaded with steel years from the a business that is a huge trucking company that owns three thousand trucks has three thousand drivers there now they're going to go over the four hundred working days easily if you have more than two drivers you're go property because it's related to an agricultural enterprise right i believe an argument could be made for that point your honor that's that's a much more tenuous case than the case at hand where the driver in question admitted in his affidavit that i  the statute that amendment is an agricultural enterprise which is much broader than that and it's clear from the you know there's a line from the from the up off case that references back in the horse and wagon is never ever haul any corn or are pigs or cows or anything related to a farm because you're not going to cover it because it can always go back to that agricultural exemption or enterprise and i still think that's the intention and interestingly was a nine hundred twenty four peterson case involving the song hell and that's the only part of my brief i put in bold to tell it's underlined because i really want to bring your honor's attention that it says it certainly could not  contended that a man could own a large car operate a minor largely fake industry and be exempted from the provisions of the act because such business was conducted upon his farm so here's a guy who was working in a sawmill operation on a farm and later because presumably it did not exist prior times when the act was written but we have a good vocal enterprise's thrown in if it leaves a question as to it just that they took away work done on a farm or country place is that what it supplanted or is it a broader concept in today's  impression that the legislature was trying to protect the small family farm or i want operation it's arguably the big debate is whether it's five hundred work days or four hundred work days in the order etc that sort of thing i  agree that's the only thing that seems to stand out you know in a debate legislative debate if there's anything for it but i don't think that's as important in this case as the fact if you look at the work of my guy i was doing driving the truck between one