Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Technology Stocks : ULBI..Ultralife Batteries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David Maginnis who wrote (417)	12/26/1999 2:31:00 PM
From: Dennis Roth	Respond to of 522

The transfer date on Barrella's transaction was 12/6/99. The day before I talked to him at the December 7th annual meeting. The trial was just getting started as of December 7th so Barrella couldn't have known the outcome at that time. Depending on how much work the courts got done before suspending for the holidays, the trial may or may not have finished before the holiday break. It's probably worth a call to Peter Commerford monday morning for a status report. They wouldn't sit on a verdict for three weeks so the insiders could clear. Also it wouldn't have remained secret for long because the plaintiffs would be crowing about their victory. The jury's decision when rendered is not likely to remain unknown for long. Please keep in mind that Ultralife is not the sole defendent in this suit. The Plaintiffs are after Leob Partners Corporation, an investment firm that they claim they had a contract with to acquire Dowty. Even if the jury finds for the plaintiffs, it is unclear how much of the judgement would be against Loeb, how much they might find against Ultralife and how much of any judgement against the company would be covered by insurance. Also a judgement againt the company could be appealed to a higher court. I think that if there had already been a large judgement against the company, we would have already seen a strong negative market reaction. The Facts about Lithium page has been on their web site since at least July if not longer.

To: David Maginnis who wrote (417)	12/27/1999 10:45:00 AM
From: Dennis Roth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 522

Case Dismissed >> I am beginning to believe that they lost their court case over the English plant << The case of William Boyd and Leland Coleman versus Loeb Partners Corporation and Ultralife batteries. Case number 97- Civil-3970 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District Court of New York was closed 12-17-99. Case Dismissed, The judgement was entered into the computer 12-21-99 and the plaintiffs have thirty days in which to file an appeal. If you don't believe me, call 212-805-0136 then go through the phone menue by entering 1 then 3 then 1. When you get to the records clerk, give him case 97-Civil-3970 and he'll tell you about it. Given how persistant Boyd and Coleman have been I bet they will appeal. The dismissal was the result of the jury's verdict on the facts and not a legal technicallity