here about the premarital agreement that the party signed before they were married and up the circuit court found that that agreement was valid especially found that the circuit court was asked several times by kelly to find the agreement unconscionable and wrote and did not do some of the fees the circuit the circuit court expressly invoked the statutory hardship exception for maintenance for kelly to avoid the agreements pension was rich instead the court divided his pension as a court is to divide a pension in the state when there is no schedules so in other words he listed certain property like the motorcycle training motor in a home because there was some residential real estate and so camping same argument that you make here talk the way i read it was it was a different aspect of that part of the agreement or those particular assets i think were some segregated from the marital property because  well just in case it was a very short term it was not a short marriage course right but my my understanding was that the only access it currently in existence the time of the divorce was other words of statutes require that of that property if it is covered by a premarital agreement that be noted with the county clerk missouri so that you know so  purchaser knows that that property is not is not cannot be freely bought sole and the second of the two statutes there vende they follow i've got to think if that's all that's all it tell he's got to say on the subject of why i'm sorrier all should should govern then what are we talking about that's me that's worth record she will in three years be earning as much as here because she's going to school as a radiology technician and because the court ordered the hardship masons three years so much in three years she's going to be starting a career which she can do indoors she can do for quite a while but she will be capable of having done for two decades by the time she's sixty  argue for seventeen years you know they were married seventeen back and of course happened she was at home with the children at least the first fifteen before the divorce was final episode requests to raise the children and she omitted those years from a working career she could never mention during that time she couldn't get credits for it so i mean i think you're kind of limited to the contract of the parties and the whys and the justice argument can  up until the time the marriage but it did not apply to basically anything that accrued during the marriage he said well done if that's the case then why would you even list the assets well if you take that analogy like you said here regardless of whether the assets existed at the time of the dissolution of marriage none of the other assets would have been listed because those assets in of itself either existence prior to the marriage would be characterized as non marital whether they existed or not at the  so if you look at the time of the drafting of the contract then there'd be no need to list any of the other assets the motorcycle the truck the boat the other investment accounts at that time so by taking that analogy and saying there's no rationale for not extend that to do new additional purchases of that contract now the fact that we have we have a marriageable seventeen years in the circumstances a lady who not necessarily by her choice but at the request of her husband gave up her working career for that time frame to dedicated to making the home raising the children and gave up her career her retirement that she could have paid into her investments that she could've purchased for her own retirement to allow her husband to continue working and in crewe this benefit to now then say that she is going to be basically punished for doing something that he requested in in our position is totally unfair to the me ask you the same question basically  it would be very difficult i think that you would have to do in that case i think the person explaining that would have to give more of a financial analysis and the detail of that asset is forcing how it's going to cruise what the estimated benefits are from the retirement account saying  change to invest at the current rate what those benefits would be and there would have to be a lot more complete disclosure as to what the potential benefits would be during the life of the person's working life until their retirement and if burden to the husband in this case to show our clear convincing evidence that there was complete and accurate disclosure to her in reference to the benefits and we argue that those even exist and benefits weren't disposed because this is value is i know there is no analysis as to what those benefits accrue with yielding it to a benefit to him when he retires for  there any analysis or financial disclosure asked to the pope pension contribution or retirement earned from this retirement for a period of time up until he retires scold her so that she would have an understanding that we're giving up something him for the time frame when he's younger and now he's not able to accumulate because she can continue to work given her age for a long period of time the so what we're premarital property and either way the court appropriately applied that to the post and we don't dispute that the the factory here though is like you said there has not been a complete disclosure by him records for what their interest for at the time of the op we were dealing with a marriage that was that was contained within the state of illinois the benefits in the rights of those parties the interest of that is in the interest of the state of illinois situation here in the reference to  season day to day basis and on the facts and in this case what's the difference that he had four hundred something to her retirement benefit at the time they got married for one thing off that was not go reason that appeal cannot be prosecuted without a report of proceedings we certainly don't need to rely on it apparently kelly needs to rely on it a great deal from what supporters for but what the court he instance that kelly minute rove but she knew how much the premarital portion of the pension was i don't know if she did or she did we don't have the record we don't know