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 : Compaq -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PCSS who wrote (96903)	4/8/2002 1:15:40 PM
From: Elwood P. Dowd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 97611

I would think that the judge will make public his decision on the issue by Wednesday and that the merger vote could be confirmed and certified as early as Friday this week. omho, El

To: PCSS who wrote (96903)	4/8/2002 1:45:04 PM
From: The Duke of URL©	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 97611

From the This is a wildass guess Department, I have NOT taken the time to study Delaware law, BUT, firing from the Lip: What is going on is that it sounds like Delaware did the same thing the Federal courts did. There used to be a summary judgment motion, and a motion for judgment on the pleadings, and a motion call a "demurrer", which is basically Latin for, "Yeah? So What" Some courts have combined all these into a general motion to "dismiss" which is what Delaware may have done. So, summarizing a whole lot of technical law, That would mean that the Judge is doing the following: he is looking for any reasonable cause upon which relief might be granted. If he finds none, he will dismiss Walter's suit. He may just refuse to grant an injunction, which would allow the vote to stand, but would give walter a chance at money damages, only. I don't think he has any problem with one of Walter's issues. Walter alleges fraud in the projections of the merged company. No can do, Waltee Boo. You can't fraudulently predict the future. Since no can really see the future, you can't lie about it. HP could have lied about the current data used to predict the future. That is what the Judge is now looking for. But carly is not that stupid, if you are going to lie, why lie about an existing fact, when you can lie about your opinion of that existing fact. The latter is the meat of dismissal. Walter will lose on this point. The other is the Duechmark Bank vote change. If the company bought the vote with a binding contract, that would me a voter trust, which is illegal, and would probably be sufficient to create some problems. But if they just did it to make management happy, knowing that a happy management would give them business, the the Yeah, so what "demurrer" type motion to dismiss obtains and again, Walter looses. This is what the Judge is making sure there is NO evidence of, now. I.e., that there is NO evidence of any binding contract. This is the difference: Vote for me, and I obligate myself legally to borrow the money from you. or, Vote for me, and I will do every thing I legally can to give you the business. The first, Walter wins, the 2nd, Carly wins. Under the old Summary Judgment Motion, if there is ANY theory offered, the [HP] SJ must be denied, even if the chances of it being proved are slim and none. That test is lessened by the new combined motion. Duke, J. Do not rely.........., etc etc. Duke. there will be a short quiz following the lecture. :)))