that time he was standing up he was the supervisor of welding and he had been given welding for the railroad for nearly twenty years general labor for only six months that time period because of the welding that the group was negligent for having him walking m l s that much at the time now there was a dramatic change that happened and that's when we believe the family claim arose the dramatic change was standing for more than two hours that he couldn't climb up and down onto the machine they had to give him a different job but his knee was ready so badly that he couldn't do that and then the day before his fifty second birthday he was wired to terminate the friess rule doesn't apply here the first rule is a group rule for a one condition that causes over a period of time repetitive injury and really the question is we're going to put off using the discovery rule until this injured numerous times in football having a stress test where he is needed but popped out on him getting out of a poor wheeler when his knee and went bad he mentioned several things and of course he would vary the will they get and he was overweight and all these things added to the his years of working for the railroad was the cause of his knee pain and i was testimony yes no i agree with dave you're right dr scott snow did not make that conclusion but just very november of two thousand and therefore he is appealing playing group and that what happened later was was irrelevant to that we disagree totally with that we believe that there wasn't a feel disability from the railroad because of his left knee he also had a back problem and another problem but he was actually on disability because of his left knee and that's what he hired before because he was a complete disability that occurred in two him to additional injury and unfortunately just was right and it destroyed just me in the next three or four months it got sort of screw shooting that the doctor said ok you can't do this anymore and he ends up disabled so we believe that the appearance that happened in the middle of developing to through september of two thousand and two that was the of it which created the f b i link way obviously three years after that is the middle two thousand and five to september of two thousand and five but that time it had to dependence for his if pilate playing with this epi alike playing specifically for a period of several months they didn't fi anything and when he was dissatisfied with the way that they were returning paul's except to say once and well everything's fine if i only hired them in july two thousand and six so they ha of august of two thousand and six that mr lay those of the damages your honor we believe then that genuine issues of material impact exist as to when the actual starts starts here as station limitations running we disagree totally with that as a matter where we find it hard to understand why we even defending the situation because this particular for discovery sanctions and those motions were never heard but only june sixth two thousand and eleven the court takes away the state from doing discovery against defend and since outstanding motions for a hearing on september eleventh purse of two thousand and eleven the only outstanding motions at this time were plaintiff's motions or sanctions so the defendant then two weeks later by was a motion for summary judgment which is the only thing that's called to her hearing on july first we barely were able to get an answer in on time the judge had had a chance to read it and haven't read it so we believe judgment i should know the answer to that and i don't i believe that ice pointed out at the beginning of that hearing that this should be that the motions which are separate hearing are motions and that their motion is that this two thousand claim is abandoned because it's not filed within the statute of limitations so we but you have other claims just anything that's of course and that was never discussed with them  the wall thirteenth two thousand and two they would still be getting along ok if there had not been a change in his work or comments and that's dr scott's office know this and that i agree with that but you have to understand what i think that this is to the amount of time the cumulative injuries fear with regards to the left me with those which period between the time that is a job change to require ten thousand feet of walking through the time that he was completely disabled how do you respond to defend a statement that when the injury gets worse because of a job change it doesn't extend the statute of limitations well i would disagree with there on the all cases that i could kind and three where changes were cases in supposed to know they're injured relates to where there was no change there that is not this case in the case this is a case where the an issue a situation which was merely an aggravated battery of many like life backers if you look at the doctor's office eleven twenty two they'll say no you'll see all the things that he points to that led up to this problem with his knees and he said he also were down the river for over thirty years but he d even say in this note that that was a positive but this was a situation which was easily controlled with violence with medication he never missed a day's work but it became totally disabled when he had an entirely new judge which was because there was no negligence and that's exactly what is happening here the case where there was a negligent they were hiring time to bring they didn't bring