interpreted so that only beneficiaries who are entitled to payment at the time that they request an account are the only ones who can ask for an account of a trustee under a trust practical matter if we decide this case whichever way you decide to stay and your client actually gotten the information that is n son's at the time that you asked for the account and that is critical because that is precisely what we have in this instance where the defendant trustee raised the point that under the trust  hand the trustee herself is the primary beneficiary gets paid x amount per month there is a second to say by ruth a person called ruth barnes supposed to get x amount per month and then  gets to have her taxes insurance paid and then it says any excess income is then distribute well to my client amongst other beneficiaries so they raise the defense well there's no excess and therefore you're not  is precisely what got rejected in the bull's case which had a son that had applied for an accounting there was a prior life state of his that he was living the primary beneficiary before it said even th on the prior states in other words or specific money amounts to be paid out you see those money amounts then it goes to to the remainder man so we have both those elements and so the the immediate best thing is indicated only when the postponement of the prior state is for the convenience of the property so we have specific money amounts of income to be distributed that's for the benefit of preserving income beneficiaries would be all the individuals named in the trust which would be carol stasi the ruth barnes the state which is to be paid well sort of from and then we have all the other places sam they are all income than district cited section eleven but they went on and they said well under common law a best of major man has a right to count and it is interesting at the time of the posts and the way one section eleven was could quite frankly the reading of eleven eight is simply i would suggest a statutory articulation of the common law which is often done by the general assembly there is wall that's out there they want to put it on paper make darn sure that log is not disappear because of the vagaries of succeeding generations of appellate bench is that might have a different view on some  those beneficiaries are eligible to have benefit of and so i think it's probably written and the court must keep in mind what is the ultimate point or policy behind a broad interpretation of that  point is this how do we keep trustees accountable well through an accounting you have to keep the hammer over their head and if you take that away and say the only persons that can ask for an accounting are those persons that should be paid at that moment that they requested makes takes away the hammer quite a bit because now you could have the trustee say they were asked for a cameo no you're not entitled to any payment at this time therefore you're not entitle for me to provide mine this year i have provided with my bills and show you what the income is and all that it's kind of like in the movie stock seventeen when william holden the let's see here bills i'll see a tax return telling me that you have ills that's nothing more than a statement if you have bills let's see the bills let's see the lease so we can verify what the income and expenses are so that this hammer stay over the trustees head and make sure that there was no foul play or negligent play by the trustee that's the policy purpose behind an accounting is the trustee here are required to paper in you know tries to do a of a balance sheet at home like we do our checkbook and then yeah the trust simply says the trustee shall manage the property corpus and then make the can have massive fluctuations of issues from year to year and something like that and that leads to the we touched on it on the second issue here was the summary judgment proper let's presume  reasonable minds that could differ on even undisputed facts summary judgment would not be appropriate and that is what we would suggest here so for the reasons stated we would ask the court that the summary judgment be the first in the matter remained in the further pr that actually is free by his plea he kept referring to when the beneficiary asks there are some duty to respond there's nowhere in this complaint that there was ever quest oint so situations that common sense would suggest it's been ten years since we've had any county from the state there's been income from the property you know there's been expenses we're just not sure whether there's accessing them or not give us something to set our mind is no where in the record does that situation exist why didn't you just go ahead and no reason not to provide what exists at that point in the future well understand what you're fighting over there well the the fact that there was the lawsuit that was ro asked i wouldn't mind if you trim the trees but now that you've gone ahead and trim them i'm not file a lawsuit or anyone i don't understand once the complaint is filed if there's no reason not to give an accounting why not give the accounting and absolutely because now that we know that this result could happen the tax returns are done every year those are provided you know there are specific questions relative to those  information as would be reasonably necessary to enable him to forces write some trust now i think if i read your shoes if somebody asked for certain information you don't have to go to court our lawsuit say i'm asking by my allegations why but when someone asks for information the trustee has to say is that the type of information that reasonable for you why can't he see the leases so i think that when we get into specific facts the other could be other things that would go into that group but we don't have it escapes there there was  because the because of sanders and not show there was excess and the there was enough income for military currently entitled to receive income correct at let me give you this hypothetical suppose you had a simple trust where a it is the income beneficial and the trust the beneficiary l of eligible to have the benefit and so you would say in that situation that i gave there's no one in title to receive and yeah you have to look at the factual circumstances to determine what information reasonably should be provided so that the beneficiary is assured that their right to trust to protect you think  report and finally off on this thing about the tax returns and tax return accounting is not the same as trust depreciations or do so it's a different science it's a different bunch of test technical court i'm just looking at from a practical point of view because a you know what many years went by and there was no kind of you know brierly request in there and it's one thing to request it be refused it but to never have requested it off where other family agreement or whatever the box many many beneficiaries it seems to me a lemonade stand wish between say a remainder of them well so you have a situation where they receive the income for twenty five years and then