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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Joe Copia's daytrades/investments and thoughts -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: skreiger who wrote (105)	3/11/1998 4:55:00 PM
From: Joe Copia	Respond to of 25711

<<< Why did MDCE need information from a DFNL lawsuit (filed February 27) in order to file their own lawsuit against DFNL? >> Very good question. Here is the answer as far as I know it. Confirm with your own lawyer to see if I am correct. The Anderson's had refused to acknowledge the existence of any employment contract with MDCE. The Anderson's hired Torres after removing the Andres' forced resignation. Their suit confirmed that they indeed had an employment contract with MDCE. more to follow... Joe PTG&LI !!

To: skreiger who wrote (105)	3/11/1998 7:26:00 PM
From: Joe Copia	Respond to of 25711

as promised more on the DFNL saga per Mr. Torres phone conversation and email: Donna Anderson had signed litigation against Andres et al, and was to be a material witness, which has now been damaged by her lawsuit which creates a conflict for her to testify. Now Donna Anderson is in part a defendant and a codefendant from a contract she signed with Christian Film Factory, which she signed PRIOR TO Torres or Garcia being appointed to board. Again, she is material witness. Basically she signed a contract detrimental to MDCE. Under penalty of Perjury- Andersons finally acknowledged their employment contracts, which prior to the litigation they served on MDCE they stated did not exist but now by the news release and the lawsuit against MDCE the employment agreement does exist apparently. Andersons finally stated the amount of footage "delivered" to MDCE with is not in accordance with MDCE's previously stated amounts Andersons finally stated their former positions with the company Andersons acknowledged their positions with and affiliation with Definitions, and Blue Sage which is a breech of non compete MediaConcepts, Inc had to have their respective acknowledgement of these facts to support their position. Simple as that. I will be happy to answer anymore questions; Joe PTG&LI !!!