court then used the don't run found the factual assumptions of the evidence primarily about a single press conference in two thousand and seven to dismiss nearly all the cases while simultaneously finding a there is a thirty day time limit and that is applies to each individual case regardless of whether they're consolidated with their independent appeals and you know notwithstanding this court's decision earlier in this case wouldn't we have to follow that decision of the supreme court and i really rest on what we said i'm not sure and i actually instead of resting on your papers and telling us that it can then resolve the issue because i think the question before the court is whether we need to resolve it right so it's not helpful to say nobody's resolved it reg because here we are today right i mean we may have to rule on this rank so why should we rule in your favor and not just met any number of your client's claims  parker can you help help me understand what exactly you want to do on the sanctions award of attorney fees and costs is not appealable because of the amount of the fees that been set by the district court and i'm guessing why and why did those cases not apply and you have a different case that says otherwise supporting your position i think if i don't think the questions come up i think that what happens is that actions are issued in the district court the party takes an immediate appeal and in this circuit has said wait till the whole ca talking about three main issues jurisdiction on the sanctions appeal jurisdiction on the individual appeals other than the law or night his case which we concede jurisdiction is proper on and then tolling issues related to the personal injury and none was pleasant or night as in their reply brief there's an awful lot of talk about debbie debbie is alleged to do cherie duties but i think it's important to point out there's never been a breach of produce here duty can claim in any complaint and as such claims even if they had been brought would be hard but of same three or statutes the riposte hazard issue there's also a lot of talk about royalties in the reply brief there's never been any claim in any case that debbie debbie has not paid these performers every dime that appeals proper to the spine and they made no attempt to distinguish the authority that we cited in short we think that is a foreclosed appeal at this time on the substance of the peals your honor as we said our position is our legal our night  probably before the court when the whole case came down and the answer of what mr tyrus and his counsel that was precisely nothing in fact the whole decided on exactly the same day that summary judgment was granted one of the underlying cases like grasso singleton case which could have been immediately pealed by virtue of the whole decision and they did nothing they did not feel that timely and they waited until all the cases were hall was decided what they should have done at that point is exercise reasonable diligence and move to withdraw the mandate which they didn't do anything even if all that was still well past the thirty day don't think so you're on because i think what they indicated in the cases we have cited is the jurisdictional rulings can never be made prospective and they have to be applied sensibly retroactively and there are no according to the supreme court's jurisprudence on this any of these cases in your view or on timeline or would we have authority to assume for the sake of argument that we had jurisdiction and then if we were to agree with all the your merits position circuit had reversed prior law holding d that attorney disqualification decisions could be immediately appealed and held as such rulings could not be appealed but then went on to review the merits of the case the supreme court in that case not a pluggable in this case because keep in mind that if we make some sort of presidential ruling it would apply across the board do you think that there are any other equitable or other guy turns out there that perhaps other parties would be able to invoke if they declined to take a timely appeal under your version of hall during the period before hall was decided but the other words parties that thought they were following circuit precedent to the letter and it turned out they were wrong do you are you aware is there any equitable doctrine out there that they would be entitled to invoke again regardless of whether your adversaries entitle to the question your honor i haven't haven't researched if the most honest answer i can give you is no and again i think if the court reads the bulls case again which was a case there where  thank you and a party complied with that order and the court held there that that taking the time limit was mandatory interest external and overruled a prior line of cases by the supreme court today was a quote unquote unique circumstances exception to the everywhere in the business everywhere across the country it was a sensational story that gave everybody notice of this this idea that you can sustain these permanent degenerate conditions from head tr nobody could claim that the statute was too old for that there's other flaws d in the tolling arguments that they presented here are they they don't make any attempt to plead for each individual acts within a time period a statute that was running which is three years for the re claims five years for wrongful death claims they have the same theory for what the subsequent wrong is the same thing as the initial wrong when you get to the special relationship aspect of continuous course polling that is not  law it cannot be the same must be something different so i think there are these claims and closing show why connecticut has this riposte as some of these claims were time barred literally when richard nixon was the president or jimmy carter was a president these things have been time barred for decades and there was no attempt to separate any of them out there was only one claimant was brought it wasn't time bart that was mr singleton's and the court found it was mar