ten she was walking with a companion into the restaurant as she was breaking into the restaurant she observed her companion who was walking in front of her sweat and she continued walking towards the restaurant entrance in the parking lot sprocket lot was bad when it when i guess when they really a police officer felt that it was warranted and that was the program that they had at the bone terribly under twelve to maintain both the sidewalk and the parking lot  your client did say in the deposition that she slipped down yes and then her response to all of the oh question suggested that she really didn't know whether it was that is or not she didn't see anything she did illinois that landowners do not generally have a duty to remove national accumulations of ice if that is voluntarily undertaken the duty then becomes one of reasonable care well there's obviously a lot of kids lie about this and each one turns on its own specific  however there is no evidence whatsoever that there was any snow on the sidewalk on the day of the players fall she did not recall the whether the defendant representative do not recall the weather at the day of the fall she fell about midnight  furthermore there's absolutely no evidence whatsoever that there was any snow removal performed on the day of my fall or in the days leading up to her fall there's she testified that there was nothing consistent with the presence of snowplows she testified there was no snow on the sidewalk she testified that she did not recall whether or not there was snow in the parking lot and so i think that's another problem with their theory of this case with regards to the weather that the defendant representative testified to it was vague at best he testified that when he arrived t next morning there might have been a fire is he had no recollection again of the weather the day prior and he further testified that the weather could have been somewhere between thirty two and thirty eight degrees he did not recall furthermore at the plane or first after you slipped i don't remember do you know how that ice was how that ice made you fall i need i don't know i could have no i'm not probably could have i do remember was her answer she has no idea what made her fall she's completely assuming that she fell on ice because she saw her companion slip in a different area of the parking lot and she testified to so again that she has she doesn't have any testimony that supports that she actually fell on ice  similarly as there's no evidence of any snow removals during the day leading up to her fall there's no way that the defendant could have created or hurt somehow aggravated and i naturally accumulation well that's true of the  yes correct there is there is no evidence of snow removal there is no evidence of snow piled anywhere on the sidewalk there was no evidence of any snow removal anywhere at the property by all accounts it sounds like it was a fairly clear not a fairly clear sidewalk that happened to have some salt on it again she has no idea what caused her to fall and there is certainly no evidence that my client somehow created that  and you're free of why ability yes but the theory is that there was something on the sidewalk that rained down because you looked like body or whatever was on the sidewalk and once it went down to a boulder area it was a friend that she did slip on a very large amount of ice in the middle of the parking lot but it was nothing more than natural accumulation again without any sort of evidence whatsoever to point to even support their theory that this water somehow melted off the snow and got into the parking lot i think summary judgment was completely appropriate i'm in favor of my client there is no liability here there was no duty there was no breach of duty that can be shown not in the record i can't answer that question your ear well the only thing i would say is this and again we're at the summer internship motion stage i haven't had an opportunity to call the owner as a witness