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 : PLNI - Game Over -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (10972)	8/14/2007 5:20:19 PM
From: EL KABONG!!!	Respond to of 12518

As to whether Turek's lawyers "lied" about this, I'd say they just repeated what Turek told them without bothering to verify it. Is that considered lying? Not necessarily lying, but taking into consideration that an attorney is an officer of the court, failing to verify "facts" before introducing those "facts" into the court could be viewed as a failure to perform legal due diligence, which can (and in some cases has) led to really big troubles for lawyers. Whether or not the court is so inclined to pursue attorneys for failure to perform due diligence varies widely from court to court, from judge to judge and from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. I wouldn't hold my breath while awaiting any possible actions from a court. Usually there must be an underlying atmosphere of non-cooperation, of antagonism and so called "dirty hands" before most courts will take some action. I don't know that that is necessarily true in this case. It's very, very hard to gauge how or what any trial judge is thinking. EK!!!