A post from another board, to me from a third party:
Your question about appeal is good.ÿ I am happy you asked because I have an
answer to make your Saturday afternoon a little better.ÿ Also, did you speak
with Frank?
We have filed our case in New York State Supreme court.ÿ If Swan wanted to
appeal he would have to take his appeal to the Appellate Court.ÿÿ This is
virtually impossible.ÿ Why?ÿ Because the appellate court is established to
review cases pertaining to murder charges - if a jury found someone guilty of
murder and was to be sentenced to life imprisonment or death or some other
extremely weighty issue.
BUT, never a simply business transaction/ real estate transfer a la AWLT vs.
Swan.ÿ The appellate Court will simply reject the case out of hand.
Especially as the case was decided by a fellow judge not a jury.ÿ And our
judge is well respected in the legal community .ÿ Therefore, his decision will
stand uncontested.
Finally, I do not post on Silicon Investor so if you wish to reuse my two
recent post over there feel free.
----
And another to me from a third party:
AWLT moved for a summary judgement for specific performance.
Court accepted filing and immediately placed a temporary restraining order on
company
This means that the judge determined the case to have merit, stops owner from
depleting assets in any way, shape or form!ÿÿ Also, a Summary judgement for
specific performance simply means that AWLT has moved for an expidited
decision from the court in a basically real estate transaction.ÿ Two
consenting parties mutually agreed to the terms of a transaction, backed by
purchaser placing money in escrow, and seller signing multiple contracts.
THIS TRANSLATES INTO A MEETING OF THE MINDS, AGREEMENT BY TWO CONSENTING
PARTIES, WITH A BONAFIDE OFFER NEGOTIATED IN GOOD FAITH FOLLOWED UP WITH
MULTIPLE LAWYER DRAFTED AGREEMENTS SIGNED, INITIALED AND WITNESSED.
THEREFORE, THE JUDGE HAS AN EASY DECISION IN FRONT OF HIMÿ - WAS THIS A
BONAFIDEÿ AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO PARTIES?ÿ IF YES, THEN DANIELLE GOES TO AWLT.
END OF STORY.
------
And one more to me from a third party:
<1998062014053600.KAA09181@ladder01.news.aol.com>
Well, it appears that while we are all waiting for the court case against
Danielle to be resolved by the judge, we are all beating up on each other.
Why?ÿ
Look the company has said that it could take two weeks for the judge to hand
down a decision on the case.ÿ The judge received all of the papers from both
sides last Friday - that is one week.ÿ So, we have a week or maybe a little
longer to wait.ÿ Once. the judge hands down the decision (which I am very
confident will be in AWLT's favor) we can focus on absorbing Danielle into
AWLT, moving towards fully reporting and reviewing quarterly reports .ÿ
Look , I understand that this back and forth is due to our collective
frustration in an unfortunately long drawn out court case/ friendly turned
reluctant seller.ÿ Hey, maybe the owner of Danielle does not want to sell to
AWLT because he has a good busines and sold on the cheap?ÿ Well, AWLT has
negotiated in good faith, they placed a large amount of money in an escrow
account as per sellers request (establishes offer as bonafide) renegotiated
contract many times, all to sellers demands (negotiated in good faith) AWLT
has several contracts signed, initialed by both sides and witnessed.
THIS WILL BE RESOLVED IN AWLT'S FAVOR VERY, VERY SHORTLY.
GOOD LUCK TO ALL!
----------
To all:
I wanted to pass these on in case some of you hadn't come across them in your searching.
Slim |
