never tensions with with a captive insurance company and also had access coverage about the captive coverage in retentions and included in net access coverage were some high level access policies that my client the damages awarded trial for flights twenty million dollars to the one nine hundred sixty s policies and these are policies were century has a right to defend we have the right to control them to sell cases and these applied to each individual cases if they were built to the case and this is not an insignificant portion of the game which warrants some teeth ten million dollars policyholder indicates that they don't want your defense here for going to the fans and you have no obligation consistent with mr monies testimony throughout the years caterpillar told us that they selected other policy years we put in the record numerous instances where they sent to us forms we also seven different sort of document showing that here here's a status of our attentions the control involves judgment on how to handle a stream of cases if you want to settle early if you want to spend a lot of time that way you always wanted to have control of that decision that's not what the sixt policies allow to give us recent the letter saying please send us any complaints you want us to the family but they didn't do it they didn't give us any pieces to the share they didn't give it to us they would give it to us until we got into the soup and we were able to get through discovery so until this lawsuit was brought up the fees at issue here then your you gave you said you know what he says even though we have several requests the policies issue i think we have to keep in mind what they provide these policies will provide the broadest coverage according to judge brandt respect the new senate and there are no was the best exclusions which is especially in the papers is a complaint about or a issue about the ten remote complaints there are two thousand one hundred eighty five compliance with his complaint is about  they never intended to and they never offered to write a full defense to us so we did was we instead put defense processing procedures in place and so if they'd ever come to was and said we want to defend the same reasons we chose to wait and walk away from our defense it doesn't exist we would never offer is not a single knock on this record where they say we're going to fully defend you so confusing the question is as an academic defense costs and that seems to be the appropriate point here because the whole purpose of the different interest is to make  at that time we settled the case this settled the case before they even told us about it that's not letting us control the house our policies give us the right to defend in your name hire counsel that's what we do we should you know send us a list or send us the complaints will take oh by the way as to the complaints we raised in fact the claims were in the record both in two thousand and six and two thousand me it's footnote one who are required the fact is that there are ways to of the problem with their report that they submitted it doesn't even list the cases they cannot tell you which pieces are in this judgment i cannot tell you which cases are in the judgment and i know i don't have all those complaints that they weren't all produced  is something in terms of the one nine hundred ninety one letters he referred to again those letters came with a letter saying here's our boy we've already hired in fact they're all like six months late they've already hired lawyers taken over the fence in some cases it could settle by that time in two thousand and one to give us a list that we had already settled seven hundred cases so in judge grant found that the breach the notice condition wasn't breached he said that in two thousand and one  consistent the boys who want to exercise control was one nine hundred sixty s policies don't give them that right yes we're going to work out for sure if they want to control ok we're giving up control to you but we're not going to pay a hundred percent we're not obligated to under