one the case was settled because that was the opportunity to bring it to a terminate and either less than or a limit my damages so it's one of the two but either way the complaint was timely filed on august st two thousand and eighteen the test information which was the information that was just closed as of two thousand and thirteen was the material that was relevant to your client's to the haters is that the bright line that you're trying to  let isn't that then a question about the degree of your damage not the character of your damaged i mean for example you don't get to claim your client's attorney's fees they're their attorneys fees they were settled earlier on and now we're trying to find what is distinctive as to your damage in this case that you wouldn't have known of and two thousand and thirteen and you know the findings  identify them and you're right in the briefs are in the complaint is that goodyear misrepresented to the court that it had responded to the discovery that's the essence of the and property as opposed to sort of you know a collateral impact from the damage that may have been caused to your clients is rico allow you to recover those kinds of what i would think of as indirect type damages true asserts and it is true that good years meaning was directed at me and other lawyers and the reason why years you know the victims of these things they don't do work the whole idea is to wear people out and  accident missions directly interfered with your capacity to accept additional cases and cause a loss of revenue because you had to devote more time to this case what would be your best rico case that you think stands for the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of documents thousands of meetings multiple tours it ate my office alon and that was the good year and so and only six it's a simple calculation direct in concept you know there was nobody other than me who has standing to pursue my business revenue loss or certainly the headers couldn't do it it's damaged and not particularly complicated to figure out and there's a bird fear of that that is a scraping the i thought i wrote it down but there's another aspect of the law that escapes me but those three able to see where post settlement where the client's really fair claims including claims with respect to discovery the plaintiff's lawyer sues the opposing opposing client saying that this case of the cause of action it starts whenever there are ascertainable damages it doesn't start again when what some additional damage occurs it's when there ascertainable damages and mr kurtz alleged that damage from the from the from the nondisclosure of the failure data and from the not disclosure of the test data and that that rendered the tire to the point honor i think the only allegation that was me certainly in the original response to our motion to dismiss was just that he didn't know the final amount of the damages because it was as opposed to the original standard for just responding to a motion to dismiss but even if it wasn't waived we know he knew that he was bringing in additional co counsel in fact in july of was occurring additional fees he knew that he was incurring exactly the kind of damage that the court found in commercial union defense costs in the underlying case those are damages that are known to be accrued you may not know the final amount but you know that you are crowing damages and that's enough under commercial union and also under the night case it's just that the fact that you don't know the fine line now is not to fission is the court held in commercial union so that's really the law in arizona that the glaze case from the arizona supreme court reported that certainly in a case that that's not a malpractise against one's own said the damages may be considerably less than or possibly eliminated and that mind which has never been cited or never been followed since in arizona every single either an appellate decision where the plaintiff in this on appeal and you know therefore one isn't damaged at all or the plaintiff loses for a reason that it's counsel's negligence would not affect so you would have lost in any of that specifically state that hiring counsel here is hiring additional counsel hiring counsel and incurring legal fees is sufficient to start having some ascertain that he was trying to get to and information he was trying to obtain the court in the hague or one case declined to allow all of that other billiard out from other similar incidents  of customers coming in with complaints about tires and then the test at it is the data that is the manufacturers testing to you know meet regulatory standards and to meet its own standards but those  in the sense that it would start an entirely new cause of action the cause of action alleged in this complaint is that the whole purpose was to advance good yours interests by the liability and obstructing justice the purpose was alleged to be that it's really not the purpose that's intended to hit him and in fact your honour's if the court looks at the complaint the only the only paragraph out hundreds of billions of dollars of liability and sacrifice customers good you're doing and intended this conduct would damage claims distance and property interests that is the only one where he said that there was an intent to hurt him and that's really a broad thousand and three when goodyear allegedly st started to try to hype this information from the public to protect itself from liability and really this is just an allegation right i'm going intention ball right try and go get additional business to try to make more money from his clients that that there are maybe a property right in the sense of a contingent intentional rights is not enough for rico by elation and merely being an incidental by product of this this this attempt to hurt consumers and protect itself from having  figure two would have been unnecessary as it would have settled then as it did in two thousand and sixteen when the truth became evident on the she was talking about a crew of the damage claims on and the damage claims could have occurred when we hired counsel i didn't know about the figured out i didn't know i was spending money for a band i was spending money knowing that i was pursuing a tough thing i had no way of unnecessarily spending thousands of hours and commercial yunior in the court should know that it's that they are cruel that incurring fees does not cause the case to accrue the matter should be reversed i appreciate the court's time