why is the what is reasonably required under the circumstances in the form of rendering aid and the score off me ultimately came to the conclusion that that there was no duty to possess and to to to the defendant in this case if they they in fact had the eight devices and under the traditional gimme analysis and all along what under the traditional do the analysis the argument is short of actually using the device there needs to be a proper placement and of variability of the device in this case the device not yet they are all being locked somewhere where no one has device accessible which in this case it was not then you know we go back in sudden cardiac arrest circumstances every minute counts the chance of survival the creases seven and ten percent every minute and so and  device but the fact that that wasn't even accessible that in essence goes to we play it goes approximate cost now in terms of the training that something that that we applied that they they did they fail to have the properly trained individuals and under the diac that is something that that they're required to have the who required to have trained users of those devices in your initial complaint though did you identify the acts and say under the act this is required or did you just make the basic arguments the basic allegations we course but there might be one in the clubhouse then that's a different that's a different fact pattern we know that they have in there we can call into the pro shop and say mr smith is having a heart attack on a ninety hour night poll we need off and you shock the individual so it's very user friendly because it's you know it's been developed in our way so that almost anybody can use a device but again just like any sort of medical device it's important to have trained individuals but they've created them in a way that society can use them without their training because they know the importance and significance of time retrieving sudden cardiac arrest essentially i want to make sure i have your idea because if we might have gone beyond what's actually in front is that your request is or you're asking us to find if there was an abuse of discretion in entering a with prejudice correct correct in the sense that there were that the defendant knows no duty and the duty is up it's kind of twofold it's the proper placement and use and control and provision of but then and in terms of three fourteen a is concerned we have a deterrent or we've argued that given the business invite the relationship that existed that was mentioned similar to is required it's reasonable even it's reasonable that these defendants would be capable of rendering that type of aid to and to use it and make available something that you don't have however when you have it it has to be available and that's kind of the essence of the bar tele case that was cited in our prayers in the sense that if you have a prevented it type equipment you have you have the duty to make it available for its intended purpose you can't have a fire extinguisher on your wall that doesn't work or you can't have a fire extinguisher box that's empty ok that's you're not fulfilling that do you need to make it available to two people to use it the same goes for a d t device you can't have an empty  corners of the complaint fail to assert a cause of action the four corners of this complaint fail to assume any cognizable cause of action they fail to they fail to simply allege that anyone from better fuel even knew that he was that  the x does the what if you country club qualify as a physical fitness facility under the  and now say that they now say that a law under the complaint is plaid there is an opportunity for for them to plead a cause of action under the statute but it was it was incumbent upon the plaintiffs to either read the custody of the of the injured party or for the special relationship counsel hears attempting to argue that we could fall into a special relationship but in order to preserve a special relationship the need to plead that the defendant help itself  doesn't mean that we voluntarily assume to use it and the easiest example i can come up with is in cases were you issued rule twenty three decisions all the time ice and snow cases there's no there's no common law do the for people that that we voluntarily assume to use it because under our laws of the voluntary the soon to be goes no further then that was assumed and if we assumed companies use the words that it was locked away in a argument in the terms of just because we have it doesn't mean we have to use it and two things are that more that just screams out we're not going to undertake the should know that he was suffering from cardiac arrest when somebody comes in is calling i don't want to see you know how an ambulance arrives throughout the course of discovery would be on the find out what the chain of events cause issue as far as summary judgment is concerned but from a leaning standpoint we have pled what is necessary for there to be not only counting on duty as argued which defense counsel kind have a membership fee that you have paid to the country club yes it says it's a private country club but i can't just walk into a y m c a i consulted start using their equipment i have to be a member of that facility and same goes for the country club