for filing suit thus the trial court erred by granting in this motion this notice we went back to the trial court i said the case for a case management conference before we had a case management conference countryfile another motion to dismiss the complaint i think that motion to dismiss is very telling for what it didn't do it did not allege that the plaintiffs had to file another complaint for i certainly didn't leave out the facts of the court already half whenever the court made its regional ruling it latched on to paragraph thirty two as having left wavering stoppel that's now paragraph ninety four certainly new allegations were alleged to demonstrate the the painful history here of what had happened as we left in the past where before you country past the one year but i think that we should because of two reasons what's that one year has passed there if you want to point there continue to be meetings that country calls that arose alice's come to the countr pays out hundreds of thousands of dollars for that while including after that one year has already passed they will whether they can point their attorney tells them that you have to complete the dwelling claim before you can move onto the property  parties through food expense and effort putting together groups of lost they can't then poll the contract limitations put it out of their back pocket as as you're on a road in the fall pines vs all space if in that case they paid part of the claim well after the limitations period it already expired that shows that they recognize there was still a viable claim here everything comes through for years after the contractual ations period has expired demonstrates that they knew and that's that's all there in the can point now if you look at the response countryfile they seem to suggest well there are still questions that we have well i'm sure that there are but fact leaving has been taken to an excess here that is just astonishing you only have to allege ultimate facts out every single piece of evidence that could possibly come out at trial and that the country had every opportunity in its response brief to raise other arguments other reasons that this complaint should be dismissed as a matter of law they didn't raise a want all they did was latch on to judge  court has already given in my opinion very clear directions which he didn't follow this court has the discretion based on the record it has to tell just passed a school year is signed if the court is going to do that i will raise it w may not be the most comfortable hearing i've ever had but i will raise it to the judge files because i really do feel as though he's just not on the same page with this four or the law in this case and i'm not sure that that he will get there  many instances where something that happens down the road proves something that happened earlier defendant was driving that car the two collided at such and such an intersection i've defended this negative that's all you have to do you don't have to say defendant was driving at that thirty eight miles an hour and twenty five mile an hour zone or of action or preacher contract based on the very clear first of all that the complaint never should have been dismissed in the first place but then the court proceeded to list another area where judge klaus had erred instructions to the trial court that at that early phase the court should or certainly should have let me amend i don't read anywhere in the court's benyon an instruction that we were ordered to amend the complaint asked of the timing of what happened and when in our reply brief we specifically lay out all the allegations from the complaint and when that they happen so this court can review them there continues to be this assertion that we have never alleged that the plaintiff's relies on country for a presentations even if that is over review they could have easily said in their response for judge klaus didn't fall the sports prior direction or even of racial profile says ruling and then said but even forget that there are other reasons that this should be dismissed it's a do novo review here of my cases here are my arguments tell the rows ows is there a lawsuit should be dismissed anyway regardless of if we agree about waivers stoppel and tolling and contraction limitations period they chose not to do it and so we i think this court should say it should be reassigned to another judge so that hopefully we won't have more confusion about whatever the order of this court is assuming that this court sends it back to trial if the court doesn't have any further questions