SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : USXP . APAC . PKGP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: scion who wrote (2107)7/1/2008 8:24:04 PM
From: scion  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 2347
 
07/01/2008 336 STATUS REPORT. Doc 336 extract PART 4
------------

The Miami-Dade judgments

As noted in the Receiver’s first report, the Company received two judgments in Miami- Dade Circuit Court in 2001 and 2003, in the litigation entitled Universal Express, Inc. v. Select Capital Advisors, Inc, Ronald Williams et al, Case no. 98-08358, totaling, with interest, approximately $700 million.[4] As noted in earlier reports, the Receiver engaged the former counsel for Universal Express, Arthur W. Tifford, to continue his collection efforts on a contingency basis. Mr. Tifford has reported to the Receiver that his efforts to collect on the judgments continue. There have not been any collections during the period of the Receivership.

Altomare purports have a 30% personal interest in these judgments. The Receiver has found no paperwork that supports this contention.

[4] As noted in earlier reports, there were two trials in this one case, against two different groups of defendants. In the first case, there was a default judgment on liability and, therefore, only the issue of damages was tried to a jury. In the second trial, the defendants did not have counsel. In the first case, a judgment was entered against all three defendants jointly and severally, for $388,908,600. It was comprised of $87,622,000 in compensatory damages, $26,286, 6000 of prejudgment interest and $275,000,000 in punitive damages. The second trial resulted in a judgment for $137,407,253.10, including pre-judgment interest. The total cash collected to date resulting from both a cash payment and stock liquidations, all stemming from collection efforts directed at defendant Ronald Williams, is $1,123,500.71. This sum went to pay Mr. Tifford’s contingency fee and expenses and to pay Mr. Tifford for his representation of the Company, Mr. Altomare, and Mr. Gunderson in this case. Mr. Tifford was negotiating with Williams and had reached an agreement with him for the turnover of some funds in September 2007. Williams failed to do so. It should be noted that Williams was charged with securities fraud in the Southern District of Florida in December 2007. Trial is currently set for July 2008, but there is a motion to continue pending.

Mr. Tifford is currently engaged in litigation in the Western District of Texas in the case Tifford, P.A. v. Tandem Energy Corporation et al, 07-civ-00049 in an effort to collect a portion of the judgment. On April 14, 2008, the district court in that action entered summary judgment against him. The matter is now on appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Also, Mr. Tifford is in possession of some penny stocks that he had collected earlier from Ronald Williams, the lead defendant in the Select Capital Action. According to Mr. Tifford, he has received an opinion that it is not a good time to liquidate these stocks. Also, some must have restrictions removed before they can be sold. Mr. Tifford is also suing over a promissory note. The Receiver cannot gauge the value of the stocks or the promissory note. Given the history, there is no cause for optimism.

The Receiver is prepared to offer these judgments to the highest bidder after proper notice in a legal publication of record and of wide distribution and will ask the Court for permission to do so. The Receiver makes no representations or warranties of any sort with respect to this potential sale.
----------