apparently the and action was taken we don't know because no evidence was ever introduced by the pay as to bring me to sign that that they would  my understanding is that it doesn't make any difference whether good return is right or wrong i think after the three year period you've got to say anyway the stay open and we don't think it's a consequence something to that effect but there's nothing that the big ever said and i don't know maybe they thought if we note was hundred into right around september second of two thousand and four by mr over and at that point in time he took out one hundred twenty nine thousand dollars should mention it's refinance if you have an existing outstanding principal and it is true that there was a ten ninety nine see him executed by the bank and submitted to the iris and this was done to comply with reporting requirements of the r s s it was not at this charge of the no it was a section agreed that a person entitle to enforce an instrument like this note with or without consideration may discharge the obligation of a party to pay the instrument by and intentionally voluntarily accept such as the surrender of this instrument by a to the party destruction of the instrument mutilation or cancellation of the instrument cancelling or striking of the parties signature or the initial words to the instrument indicating in situation there's we collect against his accounts and mainly because we can probably review his account of your but maybe he only had four thousand plus the wild card minimum for a bankruptcy issue there are other reasons an obligation is here that we had so to say that he didn't offset against an account that he had existing is a little bit disingenuous now we have the ability to close in this situation the father claims which is appropriate i have a the time will be offset because that now becomes income to us that passed the report so if we are able to collect and the hundred twenty nine thousand plus interest that's something we now have to report so even though it may have been a benefit one point on a ta issue it now becomes also a negative on this tax cycle because now we have to pay based off of income that we've received that is something that we have to now report as to the cancellation issue or a cancellation of a ten  the tax time that they're filing the ten united seem i'm what i'm going to kind of put this in personal terms a week and a half ago i had property stolen from a house that i can it's a rental i had property stolen from any statement or is just asking a question for the purpose of again going back to the issue of discovery one of these the calling in have to wait but when there are issues such that maybe this could be resolved when you have all of the information maybe that is one of those are the kinds of things that would be reasonable to determine what the end of the parties were sure that the biggest thing for the bank would have been for mr hofer to pay the has not been discharged it has not had any notations ionic cancelling it in any way under i eat ten miles yes five slash publications dealing with this issue it is not a cancellation with the intention of never being able to collect on that  not deal with giving deference to how the i r s is applying the rules here it did not and those courts did not give with that it should be only looked at the ten ninety nine c and determine that's a cancellation without looking at the bigger picture oh sure because you're reaping the tax benefits at that time so you can protect deductions but then when you do collect them a year two years six years later whatever it is at that point in time it's no income that you have to report not if you take into account the i r s determination of what that document means which is why the letters are i would not only suggest that but also the iris interpretation application of the ninety nine c and the act application of it is important absolutely the publications do you address how the iris is interpreted those but if that statute if that rule is the same as it was before birth as the apol on after was answered it was never acted upon by the col we sat here for two plus years weeding before we submitted our or somebody's judgment at some point we have to move things along the summary judgment as i understand it is a put up or shut up that he needs to put forward this can achieve use executive needs to put forward whatever information is important and necessary to reach or proper determination here no written discovery did in presentation of the note which we did as well copies were attached all of them showing that there was no marks no notations no cancellations or striking any portion of it said who is going to be hearing this case and they didn't know so what if that i think it's a situation that won't take up again because i think now