injunction granted, they must deliver the 4 million shares to court. only condition is amazon cannot short stock themselfs.
I suggest that you reread the explanation offered by my lawyer friend, and further recommend that you attempt to get a grip on the fundamentals of literacy.
The business re: depositing the shares with the court is what's generally known as interpleader. Interpleader is a "device" which allows a third party, such as a bank acting as an escrow agent or, as in this case, a brokerage company holding shares in street name for an account holder, to "deposit" the assets with the court to let the court sort out what's going on and decide what to do with the shares or the money. The usual situation is when an escrow agent is holding funds that both sides are claiming belong to them and, rather than try to figure out who's right by itself, the escrow agent throws up its hands, interpleads the money with the court and asks the judge to figure it out.
Not knowing what's going on, I would surmise that plaintiff tried to get a TRO on Friday on very short notice to stop Mann from trading and the parties settled before the hearing on the TRO. The case will not go away until the court decides on the merits in the interpleader action. The order here memorializes a settlement between the parties that basically says I won't trade so long as the company doesn't do anything that will screw me. It was drafted by the lawyers and signed by the judge, who was probably relieved that he didn't have to hear this thing Friday afternoon when he was planning to be on the golf course. Then, the "innocent" defendants (Oxford and Canaccord) will initiate an interpleader action and let the court decide how this should end up.
Hope this helps, but you seem incapable of understanding even expositions of such exemplary clarity as this one.
|
