good morning you have probably already notice we're missing someone we actually should be sitting here that would be just a suspect but she is unable to be with us today she will participate in conferences with us as well as hear the world argument make sure you speak clearly into the microphone so she can hear everything and also if you know protocol just as hudsons in the wrong place but i guess justice had such a good day or so that i'm having some back problems so if i fall i'll fall on him when we leave but he doesn't have to wait for me when we get out so it's a little different if you're with familiar with the protocol but now i think we are ready so mr johnson whenever you are ready  immediately i know what the order says i've seen it i read it but we have some things in the miracle settlement agreement about retirement or pension programs they're not specifically named there are three names but they're not even correctly they say they have different actual titles when you look at the plans so how how can we say that their order results all when we don't have all those pensions identified i think we can do it right in the st of all because the ones that are identified so it would have made all the sense in the world so that this didn't get later upset by a heart for ready by the yellow to have settled the ex wife and the company they were talking about a three thousand one hundred dollars amount that she would receive they even though this was a you see not a value plan this is also what's called  which has all sorts of idiosyncrasies so to speak in in them as well as the fact is alienation cause you're talking about is often disregarded by pension administrators because they don't want to be sickly argue about it no i mean shit and one last thing and doesn't it appear that they this pension administrator did not want to argue and said she and in those regards it has to have meaning is i mean i didn't see any evidence in this record that she sat down with him on a regular basis and look through all of his assets and look through all of the things that they hand he had several of these types of plans because this is what he did for a living he knew how to set these up he knew how to define them kenya how to distribute them where in the record does it say she knew that he had done this and then they got the document that says i think i know everything sure he does he doesn't specifically say if you had in those words but in the in the in the prove up of the matter there was no question back to one thing you just said what about the fact that i believe that melissa testified is there the sixteen thousand dollars was part of a bonus that had been awarded subsequent to the actual judgment but during the period of the myriads and this was the the balance of that particular distribution i know she testified to that in you awards a considerably more amount they hack payment back and do from the this account this access to how do we reconcile those two week two thousand and eleven or so when he said he was forced to take it which also seems to defeat your argument that he didn't even know that this was something he had to take so if this is something he wind threw away when they sent that letter they acknowledged the quadro and said she's entitled as a result of these plans that are identified to determined or anything else but he didn't get a copy of that letter no i mean he's sitting in fact took part in making the play and he was it's incredible to me that he did not know of that letter he he was not something like a plant which was not named the for one k plan if it did including non qualifying deferred compensation plan in that the excess deferred compensation plan also by another name was included so when included in the division yet because of that almost exact same language it was determined that the judgment was not ambiguous the intent of the parties was that the retirement plan of the husband wor wouldn't you agree there would have been though a better way to meet this point when we had so many we had different plans that your client according to the judgment should have been aware of she said she was aware of these plans yes they weren't really will identify were they well i think that again the types of plants with her identify actually says it says these flames i mean include these lands doesn't say this type of plan but it says her for a one piece savings plan which was not that was not the name of the world on a plan all compassing her retirement plan included all horseshit in fact while at the time of this dissolution back and what two thousand and one was melissa also in the pension business planning and selling these plan the husband is for oh ok plan will be distributed the wife's pension plan will be distributed and then when you enter the actual order if you divide it which is the qualified domestic relations order that worst pacifically names the name information you need to divide pension and then when they approved it later they said you get thirty one of four which of course encompassed both plans so through discovery there's no way for counsel to get the exact plan information prior to the time of judgments entered there is and there was some information tendered what we received only aware that there was that he received a pension that's all she knew at that time she did not understand what that compassed mr eagle heard on the other hand selling retirement plans would understand w i assume that your argument would be very similar to this next question why is this not a modification since we have this new information that your clients a lot of apparently didn't know at the time why isn't and if this isn't or if this is a modification why are we alleging fraud to work misrepresentation of something like th parker was injured it was approved and so everybody thought that everything had been it at that time but the court reserved jurisdiction that shifted orders are not acceptable the court reserves regarding the division of these assets and says the division of the excess plants to has not been accomplished and no longer be accomplished through a wire oh good court would reserve the jurisdiction regarding the division of th already gone into over one hundred and sixty pounds so if she were to live for fifteen years twenty years it would be likely more than two hundred and fifty thousand dollars for worship the total over twenty years i believe was three hundred and forty is also mean i believe as the surviving spouse on that particular on the qualified plan is a correct answer which is another issue that came up otherwise that he has only contributed to this excess two dollars for two years but coming up with that amount of money that was must have been really good you know disturbed really good contributions the question i have is after the marriage did he continue to work there and is there some non material money in that particular account as well he's worked there during the marriage and he worked there at the marriage and so understanding then is that when the point girls were tendered we were talking about seventy one percent of the play and that's what's been distributed that's correct at this point anyway or will be distributed your melissa felt that way when she got that letter from her through she should have done something with regard to that letter to yours as opposed to reading for fourteen years for some administrator it said whoops we made a mistake and we miscalculated now what is she if if in two thousand and eight we said everything's fine but in two thousand and twelve a rd party not privy to that particular agreement says we made a mistake is she just supposed to say oh that's too bad for me but your interview really twenty well she didn't do anything took twenty four two thousand and sixteen i mean the issue though is i mean unless you're trying to do a or some sort of equitable relief here i'm the issue that you've raised is in twenty year wait they read they had written they've finished the property the situation but in two thousand and twelve she finds out that not thomas but hartford has made a agreed matter until we're late in the trial so i don't know i do have another question you say that these assets had all been distributed clearly he was not retirement age at the time of it's not certainly wasn't usenet he wasn't sixty five but so the distribution of the the pension benefits had been identified but until they're actually received and i'm not sure they're even received now but until we know what they should be how can we say that by two thousand and eight order sought results all issues of distribution when they haven't actually been distributed the respect