our fourth case for this morning is to the exemption would be able to reach the proceeds of debtors workers comp award seems to me the facts of this case are very murky there is a statement  in the hearing before the bankruptcy florida that the medical providers attorneys said we had a relatively small recovery in workers compensation i can't tell by looking at the structure of the statute whether the medical build the employer i came to who are employers but whether they billed her employer directly whether they went through the procedures set forth by the two thousand and five amendment i can't figure out how those procedures songs and bankruptcy judges are very unhappy that she doesn't tell anybody that she's doing this even though the bankruptcy don't put that to one side but i can't tell what voice the providers had in this proceeding whether they were participating and her settlement whether they had any ability to exercise their rights and that statute to get paid for the way i read and frankly i don't do work employer has to stop billing or doing anything to collect the the on the claims until it's resolved in the worker's comp arena and if the statute seems to anticipate that there will be wrong it it might seem wrong but you know in bankruptcy circles and this isn't just my opinion but it's documented or it's least cited in many bankruptcy cases bankruptcy changes everything when you know that that any decision was grounded in application of certain principles of illinois statutory construction principle it focused on was the one that requires you to have a harmonious whole when you have a statute that has many parts the judge the district court judge found that in order to make this harmonious whole you need to have an implied or a subsequent show exception to the statute the illinois appellate court said we're not going to do that in fact the of the objectors in this case was the plaintiff in that case and they said we're not going to do that because it's inappropriate to ever read into the statute exceptions payment plan you know whatever and they certainly contemplated in a world where the the individual you're dealing with is not insolvent but your i think your point is that the two thousand and five amendments paid hack to stop as far as their reach when they get to a point of some type of lien being attached to workers comp proceeds that's right and they don't have that right and so wh will make sense or not i mean that that's the position at least to restate it correct decision is that these exemptions are part of the landscape that every economic actor and accident and there are did no different than anybody else who finds themselves in act to provide for this sort of i think that's sort of it is a complicated payment scheme when there's a worker workplace injury in a worker's compensation claim is filed the employee has to pick from a  and whether those payment provisions for the medical providers in the context of a workplace injury override the exemption in section twenty one i mean i am feeling very much at a loss based on the briefing in this case based on the district court's opinion and certainly the bankruptcy judge did not even address the statutory question that you didn't give notice you're out of like a cell we have a very and then there's  court i think that that's at least that's one thing you could do but but when i look at the statute i don't notice that there's any maybe i'm wrong and i think like it was a council does perhaps in that area i don't think there's any role for the medical providers to play in the in the worker's comp you know clearly for a clearly there is under the statute we just don't know what role these particular providers whether they were panel providers you have to send them to the employer during the pendency of a claim but then you can resume your private filling afterwards we just don't know the answer to that match and we have a very in my opinion a very for as a first impression opinion that's out there no by the district thing which assets are subject to being collected against is a completely different thing in their assets that are exempt and so you know i don't know whether the illinois legislature just didn't think about this at the recovery at the end of the day it's a perfectly good question but i don't know that the illinois may have taken the decision that they want to protect to protect some assets so they don't want to see part of another thing i don't know i whether there's a preference in bankruptcy that you would have to whatever assets there would be i mean that's different from a question of whether there's an exemption so what i would argue is that when the two thousand and five they that they limited the prices the backers to charge they made the go like this the obligation to pay the doctors direct upon the employer and ensure they imposed that happened here did your clients get any direct payments from  absent from the it's not in the record but i will tell you i believe there was somebody payment why is this record enough for us to make a rational decision on this case why should we just send it back to the district court who might want to remain added to the bankruptcy court and say we need more information because the bankruptcy petition itself supplies you to be honest with fact i didn't find them the bankruptcy protection says i have no assets except for my claim and in front of the industrial commission but i have a lot of of liabilities for medical procedures and there is no way for those medical claims to have been adjudicated anywhere the worker's comp commission so but that creates a judgment debt incurred so the medical providers become judgment creditors when the illinois workers compensation commission st industrial commission of the worker's comp commission are both the doctor's rights to get paid directly by the will by the employer and the worker's rights for disability benefit not the only place that's adjudicated it can be adjudicated by statute is the commission adjudicates reasonable necessary and is going to be part of the award going to be the workers disability benefits and they're wrapped up into want what the record demonstrates is that mr hernandez had the opportunity anybody that sheen she made the decision instead of the worker's comp commission as to how do it how to distinguish between the doctor's bills and one hand and her rights to disability on the other was or matters participating in her worker's comp claim a major part of where the work or was going to have every incentive under the sun to make sure those claims were adjudicated because if the worker came to get either in a ward or a settlement and those claims were not adjudicated the worker remains viable in a way that the didn't was and was not liable for so the workers got all the inside of the world took to get an adjudication from the commission such that the worker could be insulated the worker could say well you can't if i'm only entitle to thirty thousand maybe she was entitle two hundred the trustee much like the debtor is a common law trustee for the benefit of of those parties the doctors who can only make a claim through through the worker and so she reached that that duty and she twenty one that was standing the doctor's expressly permitted to pursue the worker for a trial for so isn't isn't the point you're just making right now why isn't a sensible thing given to certify this to the illinois supreme see the whole of this whole dialogue going on about a pretty straightforward section twenty one but i'm mighty complicated set of two thousand and five amendments and where that where they leave off when you want somebody aspects nice to have a mistake can be given a fact without advocating the exemption how your position is that that those are irreconcilable but on the face of the text of the amendment to provide for the human procedures are not right now so we will take the case under thank you