of based on the petitioners actual needs in this case tracy's actual needs were listed at about seven thousand dollars in the financial affidavit that she presented to the trial court this amount included  home taking those repairs that needed to be made and into accounts mihm memorandum of kenya so tracy's means are seven thousand dollars or even below that when you subtract the amount that she had listed for the about whether the person is expected to find employment but to actually see training to have a better chance of employment in this case is a thirty year marriage yes that appl been it is clear from the evidence presented at trial he does have a lot of expenses that are involved with the job he travels to chicago the clients of wine and dine high and i don't think that there was eviden than the amount that was bored there didn't seem to be any basis for that amount like a fat it did are exceeded almost by one a half times the amount she stated that she would need and also would exceed the guidelines that annoy because of his job patrick does have a lot of expenses traveling to chicago entertaining clients it me family my job that it is still a job he testified that it is a stressful job he testified that he has maintains a home here in the spring so it's not as if all of this living expenses are being covered just the expenses that he has making person he travels to chicago for his business is still maintaining a home here so he does still have living expenses that he paid so i don't think it's appropriate for the child or toward maintenance based on his reimbursements for his travel expenses and living expenses from them lawyers with regards to the trial that exhibit a with a demonstrative exhibit basically a breakdown of the information that had been submitted child that was submitted without foundation and without the opportunity protection i capture it  twenty eight thousand no i'm reading through the back of the transcript he was asked about several expenses he did give explanations for many of the expenses during the hearing i for written closing argument and didn't refer to the exhibits from the record they retain this amount is from exhibit number x but after the trial so it's very difficult to be sure that some of these amounts if not then counted twice or even three times the state's monies that are either being charged for the current reimburse monies that are flowing into account it's all laid out in the written closing argument but that's just arguments not actual evidence and there's nothing in the court's memorandum of opinion that goes to the actual evidence that was submitted so it's very confusing and i don't think that might be sufficient chance to re dissipated fourteen thousand dollars in cash over the course of a year and his living expenses are myself in a month and that's what he's using to pay most of the living expenses i think the courts evaluated what did you think contributing to his living expenses out of this occasion instead of just taking basically everything that he acquired during the separation and adding it up and saying that it's all  parties is awarded the amount of the two hundred twenty thousand patrick's home and tracy was awarded basically that same amount in marital property even whatever amount wage income was three hundred three thousand seven hundred forty but in addition to that he received forty eight thousand six hundred six dollars of distributions from the partnership ventures employer pays for every expense this piece of minutes for business so when this work says yes all these business expenses if they're coming out of his income are not and in fact as we as we showed in the evidence he received reimbursement of thirty six thousand for his housing to live in a nice place in chicago plus thirty two thousand dollars for meals and living expenses and so you know this guy in essence has almost four hundred thousand dollars worth of bonds of which a hundred is free and the judge gave him an awar so on they give him reduced health insurers she has to pay six hundred twenty six dollars a month over pay seventy six dollars every two months or every two weeks i'm sorry he also has his own cell phone so i mean it's a very nice job that he has and is just starting when you pointed out this is a thirty three year marriage and contrary to what would counsel so my client only worked pretty much in the beginning of the marriage she worked for the language universalist unitarian church for a while as a staff person in the office wasn't you know in charge of anything significant she worked part time in retail her only education was high school education wired do and she was in home in charge of that of the home and family and really for the last several years of their marriage prior to their separation they lived very nicely where she didn't work at all they lived in either hotels in four hundred dollars a month in golf on average she would be able to go to the spa she'd be able to go have her face facials that she would like she would have no go she never nails done all of those this rather exhaustive record we specifically went down item by item flutie his trips to charleston with his friends to sandals with his friends buying his friend golfing equipment taking her to the of the game buying her gifts find her jewelry taking her out for new year's eve to the ritz carlton expensive dinners all of these that are listed on exhibit a are off of his chart bars and were put into evidence laboriously beyond that was the assertion made during the course of the thousand dollars was not put into an argument until the actual written argument i understand but is to each of the elements that you're talking about or each of the charges was an assertion may help out with doubt amount w idealization of the one hundred eighty seven thousand dollars in charges and we exclude all of his personal expenses normal living expenses from those and each of these claims was this a patient there was a director's fee that he couldn't explain the forty eight thousand dollars there were those a t m withdrawals of fourteen thousand three hundred sixty five dollars that was partnership income that he could that he wrote out for cash fourteen thousand six hundred on the joint account and we just said we went through this laboriously trial where did you go with that money what did you do that good of a gangster i don't know certificate of disposition and a claim just patient itemizing this patient sixty days prior thirty days after the completion of the scope of the case before this case was filed in two thousand love and did not take effect in both cases filed where of that so when we tried the case there was the added difficulty with this case that the only way records were able to be produced for evidentiary purposes yeah i did want cash yeah i spent for food i spent four dates with my girlfriend this persona for beth and he certainly had the opportunity and one of the things that we did was provide him to specifically say what did you do with the money and we went through each of these at truck and he didn't say anything as far as exhibit a is concerned we actually did forty thousand almost forty one thousand dollars did he unexplained cash from his chart i mean i could've made a claim for one hundred twenty thousand dollars of charges which were proper this far of the distribution is concerned that this mission difference between my client and mr summers is a thousand dollars thousand ten percent so this judge put a lot of effort at this sunny briefly touch on that income where mr scott argued that my client has income from his partnership interest that income was divided in the judgment that tracy would get half of that income so if we're going to award her half of that income partnership interest i don't think we can also add it to his income and it's terminations maintenance but i'm most likely nothing good on him before we're through here today would be again with address they're just kind of taken as a big lump patrick testified at the trial that a lot of the airfare was either for work it was for trips with children which i don't believe would have been dissipation but there's not specific testimony in the record addressing each charge they've just taken all the charges for air fare that wasn't reimbursed by the company dissipated but certainly many of those charges were not dissipation trips of his own children trips that he had to take for work that work reimburse testified during the trial i'm he's only reimbursed if he proactive and submit those receipts so there were travel expenses that were unremembered that have now been charged to nation it was a series of questions but it sufficient proof of why or how he spent that money doesn't seem like this deficiency that you're suggesting here the oral argument was raised were i think those two issues are ti