good morning well counsel gasman please approach rises out of the south have all of the disputes started way back when progressives on the lake front were talking about whether our country could survive a president is unfit as the be without a concern for our country he's not here today because of the weather because as i told my be talking you think back in his presence of p k the manner by which the litigation and the dispute developed had a contaminating effect on everything that has happened since the subject matter and the nature of the sensitive responsibility of the people involved in the disputes has had a contaminating impact on the progression of this matter and it court addressed with clarity two years ago after repeated efforts to get an issue resolved where the recovery minutes fishel twice said your claims are moot we fixed the problem and then it was sent back and then a third time the government said there is nothing for anyone to deal with here we have fixed the problem leave us alone so that look that is a misunderstand to withdraw ok he did it with a requirement of the supreme court and disposition of another so he withdrew and gave notice of his withdrawal and gave notice of the reason for his role as required by the rules problem with the maneuver is that it was a clever win over in a civil case but when you live by a technicality you may die by your own technicalities they could have done it right they had to do it exactly right because this was a midnight escape move to get out from a lawsuit on a dispute that is going on at that point for thirteen years where until this court's courts had been convinced by the clerk's assertions that there was nothing for the courts to address there was no need for the judicial system to hold itself under the compliance of the law because there were representations sworn officers of the judicial system that there was compliance and they came to this court after two such efforts and went back and then as a third move somebody tried to do another lucy than health and move football but in doing so they did not do it perfect perfectly and that falls on them and the reason why a follows on them is because of the nature of the remedy the whole barber kicked off is to take care of a problem where there's a class action and individual believes himself or herself or itself to be aggrieved whether suffered a monetary loss or is denied rights and the legal system is such that it doesn't necessarily make sense to expect all of those can't be trusted with that but a mandamus is not that a man they must finds itself in the words of clemmensen from godfather want a pain in the ass innocent bystander who happens to be angry or upset or sees something not going on  forty a walk and has a right to bring into the government's attention through the judicial system it doesn't matter whether that person is hurt whether that person is on reasonable whether that person is instruction to their cashiers up they just worded it well and they should fix that in your third argument is owned by the way they sent the check to the wrong person so if we could just focus on the memo really asking us hard as part of the remedy of mandamus there would be a probation against the imposition of the trial i presume that as part of their the prohibition the circuit court would want to set up a procedure that would be more likely to guarantee that there wouldn't be a recurrence of the problem and the connection that with that i would expect that the call you often would say will this work as an internal governance to make this satisfactory for mandamus but i don't know that they would be required to the fact that the corpse interpretation is set by the court is such a so and therefore the county is not going to be looking for it bad that part of how they work the fine tuning within the county i don't know that there's a need to be unable to tie the counties always looking for on motions to reconsider or to vacate of commodify non final orders this court pointed out last time that the clerk may well have an argument to take down the stringfield because the law and the practice party in the terminology of lawyers creates an opportunity for some confusion the memo created by the clerk's office did not resolve that confusion that made it worse they said these are fees we go on our charge but that and that's and that's why i think it's so important that we not allow the clerk frame the issues in terms of we don't need any help this matter is moot a court had to get involved there is a legitimate concern i'm not one of those people says we should have a lawsuit every time there should be a way a record can say can we agree upon a set of procedures that are reasonable and allow for the other reasonable oddball cases to be worked out as opposed to what the county has or the clerk has proposed which is i'm going to do what i continue to do and if somebody has a problem they can take me to court why can't it be the other way since we're here why can't it be that you must seek relief from a court if you think this is one of those handful of this positional final orders that require a fine and you get the court to say in order to hear this motion you're going to have to decide see you anyway those are things that could have been addressed in a reasonable discussion towards the goal of fulfilling this court's decision and deciding whether there was a need part of back and the reason why i'm here and the reason why have become a argument the way it is because when you're talking about something like the clerk's books you're talking about a different set of problems and the reason i believe why the circuit  counsel brought up years ago is still going the extent of the awareness of the implications of the redress of the problem has a wound to a difficult problem for people in front when i got into this case it was after this court issued its decision mandamus as a published decision i believe that this court's decision would empower the members of the circuit court to address this extremely difficult burden that falls upon all of us because the numbers don't lie and that is a huge problem that's not going to get that and we have to ask ourselves do we resort to the time honored traditions of mandamus and say it may be hard there may be difficulties there may be a lot of people upset but we're either of government of the law or a government  stands apart from the people and of all the times in our nation's history when we are not at war but we have reasons to worry about whether the government follows a law or is  the strongest statement is a statement by eight branch of government imposing the law on that branch of government because it's the right thing to do even if it will lead evidently and that's what i wanted to make this argument that i don't want anybody thinking that i'm hearing a false pretenses the decision mandated by the law in my opinion th required by the rejection of mutinous will play a very difficult set of questions that could lead to concerns about impacts on others because of the clerk's office and the only safe way for our society to handle that is to say the law must be followed going forward there would be a remedy in this case of  procedure a court would have jurisdiction over the problem people involved in that case understand the significance of the case and would do everything in their power to make sure that the world of our county gets through it but this is why profiles in courage is such a thin book still has a pulitzer prize attached to this is difficult this requires us to say we'll deal with what comes but we have to move forward the the following circumstances and then it goes on the should not be charge or a petition to vacate on modify a judgment order that is anything other than the judgment order that the supposes something else what should be charged  wrong at least to a an anonymous because that's why you sent a check so you agreed oh we should not a charge so we have a dispute here but the agree or not you dissent in the check so the question then becomes is it did the check do what it's fails the motion to dismiss space and move this makes the tender on february twenty first two thousand and seventeen and then that amended complaint is filed i believe march seventh so i can double check to make sure it's it's the prophets ory language after nature of the case i think it's page six of my brief to be correct i think that's one of three issues that need to be considered here ok so the first is the change a complete change of pelosi of the circuit court clerk's office i don't again the clerk is following yes when one i think the memo is correct i don't think it's incredible that memo doesn't say anything about orders that look like they're final but are final then i think that would be something that's included in the memo if there's any determination to be made consult with that we go office and i think that whole problem is at this rate about the cover sheet because the pilot are saying for cover sheets not the record so you have to stop talking about that we we can't pay county is bidding on them to collect all the money they can and somebody comes in and show some emotion that says this is a motion to vacate an order and the killing memo doesn't say or the salsa member doesn't say oh wait  is on its face incomplete because it does not identify the ones that are going to be problematic it says that if it's a nineteen order it cannot be certain that there cannot be a charge shop for the counter clerk then just say is this is this twenty first new policy which mark says trust me it's also it's before your honor if you just said it's in january of two thousand and seventeen and he they were dismissed in january on march seventh they both  clearly states that if they meaning the plaintiffs in this case if someone was charged a fee improperly in that interim period between yes and one they could and when the clerk filed its notice of motion to dismiss the case my case is moot they didn't send a notice else he's off this is jonathan tender wrong i think the other assumption making is that over a fix problem now we don't have any problem in the interim there was a problem in the interim these were being collected before you started this new face page that you're talking about we can pay attention to it so at the time that this case for this particular case there is still a problem with a few is being collected and i don't think that you can get around there  and again it's the filer that's going to tell the clerk not the clerk who selling the filer and i think the case law is clear that it's moot if there is no case or controversy and wrong on that one little thing that's ok well no i don't think we have all you're going to move us it's gotta be every i wish to fix a second argument judge so we have three to the barber case vs american airlines where the supreme court upheld the plaintiff's finding the plaintiff's case was moot although the defendants rejected the defendant's tender so if you talk about the origins of this country i'm a memorial we're going to we're not going to listen to i mean i know what you're talking about i don't even know what the what happened in the er twelve fifteen all of this is really the discussion impose a charge the government has no right to keep the money it collected one of the things we requested as counsel noted in her argument was an account tender of the money back to the individual from plane and of multiple complaints regardless of  irrespective of the magna carta then there is a complete release on a mandamus complaint if only one person receives a tender it is also unusual in this case of all cases that a strong argument would be made successfully in the circuit court and unsuccessfully here that the entire controversy was raised to a part of because of the specific identity of the lawyer who was improperly incompletely tender this is not oh i forgot i misspelled the name this is a person who elevated himself to the subject of a motion to dismiss an argument before this court in a published opinion that had to cite him by name  to ovoid the responsibility of a government agency to comply with the law it's gone on for fifteen years there is a problem that needs to be fixed it's not pleasant but the only way we're going to fix it going forward is if we start by going forward properly we'll deal with whatever happened in the past in the way courts deal with whatever happened in the past but we cannot have a society that says we in the government know better than the people who wrote the laws and empowered us to create the laws what the law requires us to do so go home and leave us alone we cannot have a land