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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : HITSGALORE.COM (HITT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tommy Hicks who wrote (5950)	8/21/2000 12:20:26 PM
From: Q.	Respond to of 7056

re. the Marasco suit, it's interesting to see that there's been activity, but I'm not sure what's been going on recently. Last winter, the horse lady and LFT were required to deposit the $500k with the court, which was a defeat for her at that point. I understood, at that time, that the court had not yet distributed the funds among the parties, which included Marasco (the guy who "invested" his funds with LFT) plus a couple of other guys (parties #8 and #9 maybe?) who were trying to claim that they were owed some finders fees for making the original deal. The judgment you refer to appears to involve LFT and a third-party defendant, and not the plaintiff, Mr. Marasco. But as usual, it's hard to tell from examining the docket. It's also interesting to see in the docket that the Arizona Dept. of Revenue is now involved in some way. I can also see that in another case, involving the eviction from the horse farm, there is a hearing coming up later this month.