SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Biotech / Medical : Stayhealthy.com: Monitoring your wellness on the Web
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: waldemar cyranski who wrote (2616)3/10/2005 9:32:06 PM
From: george eberting  Read Replies (1) of 3785
 
Waldy, I am reasonably certain that the suit was not filed in California. There was I motion, as I recall, by ABC to change venue to California, but I think it was denied. I've forgotten for sure where the case is sited, but Wisconsin comes to mind.

Frankly, I've always been confused about the entire thing. I heard once that STAY's rights to recover damages had been assigned to someone else (potenially millions of dollars!!??). Then, later, I was told that that person no longer had the right to receive anything, that a new group had put up something like $60,000 to pursue the action. I don't know if they have any assigned right to any recovery, or if they are only trying to get STAY out from under the loan obligation to Petters.

I've tried to call and email the individual who was spearheading that action, but have been unable to make contact thus far.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News