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 : 1ST MIRACLE GROUP (MVEE), founders last co. went $0.20-$46 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bottomfish who wrote (1111)	8/27/1998 1:17:00 PM
From: Capitalism	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 5541

The Bibyians invested $0 in to 1st Miracle. The company decided to scale back because they did not need DEAD WEIGHT. They were fired. The law suit is an issue you might notice in today's society happens all the time. Again, they invested no $$$$$.

To: bottomfish who wrote (1111)	8/27/1998 9:55:00 PM
From: LegalBeast	Read Replies (7) \| Respond to of 5541

<<< The law suit against Miracle Group looks serious >>> I have sat back here for a while and watched statements like this float past, but this has got to stop!Somebody help me out here ... Did I miss something? I was unaware of a lawsuit against the company. I was under the understanding that it was against one of the co-founders. Here is the post of Zorro: Menahem Golan is a defendant in a suit brought by Moshe and Simon Bibiyan in the N.Y. State Supreme Court alleging---BREACH OF CONTRACT, & FRAUD------entered into by the parties (RE: Deal Memo) for the production of several movies. IN ADDITION TO MONEY DAMAGES BIBIYANS SEEK TO PERMANENTLY ENJOIN MR. GOLAN FROM RENDERING HIS SERVICES TO ANY TO OTHER MOTION PICTURE COMPANY UNTIL NOVEMBER 2002. In the event that the Bibiyans are successful in obtaining an injunction, Mr. Golan would be barred from Rendering his services to MAGIC ENTERTAINMENT ON THE JOINT VENTURE. IN ADDITION, while they have not filed this clam to date, THE BIBYANS MAY PERSUE A CLAIM SEEKING OWNERSHIP RIGHTS TO THE FILMS TO BE PRODUCED BY THE JOINT VENTURES. Now let me tell you what is wrong with this information, and what is extremely misleading: First, is the emphasis on the Supreme Court. That is what New York calls their lowest state court, not their highest. They have a three court system wherein all cases are filed in the Supreme Court. They then may be appealed to the Supreme Court, Appellate Division. If they still do not like the decision, then they are taken to the New York Court of Appeals, which is the court most states refer to as their Supreme Court. Therefore, do not be swayed by a case being filed in the Supreme Court. It means nothing other than a case was filed. Whoopie! As to Breach of Contract and fraud ... Whether or not there is any merit to the case, when you file, you allege everything you possibly can (Notice please how Zorro jumps on that dreaded word fraud. It does NOT mean that there is anything fraudulent about MVEE, but Zorro wants you to believe it does). Proving anything is another matter indeed. The answer, also filed in the New York Supreme Court states that all claims of the plaintiff are false, frivolous, without merit and should be dismissed immediately! Of course, Zorro did not mention that (Bad Zorro!) As to the IN ADDITION part about any claim to ownership of MVEE movies: This is complete bashing and can be given no other attribution. We live in a country that has an adversarial legal system. Anyone can sue anyone for anything. There is nothing in the lawsuit which would support the Bibyans having any claim to ownership. MVEE owns their work product and that is that. Case closed! The lawsuit is to prevent Golan from continuing to do what he is doing. That is what an injunction is: It is to stop Golan from continuing to do what he has been doing. Any money damages are not for what he has done with MVEE, but rather for what he has not done under the contract that was breached ... if indeed it was. Then there is a principle known as "election of remedies". Generally, you cannot get both injunctive relief and money damages in the same case. I do not know the specifics of this case to see if any exception to that applies, but my best guess is that it a scare tactic only to try to get Golan to settle out of court. Unless some rare exception applies, then in court the Bibyians will have to choose if they want the injunction or the money, but not both! Damages are not in anyway what a person does for himself or any other and any definition that leads you to think that is incomplete and misleading and just plain WRONG. Damages are what it would take to place the plaintiff where he would have been if the breach had not occurred. In this case, the Bibyians must prove what Golan would have done for them. Then compare to what they did for themselves without his help, and then prove that the difference is truly due to his absence. If they cannot show that, then they have no damages! They do not have any claim to what Golan did for himself or anyone else, and can only stop him from doing more if that is indeed against the terms of his contract AND the court sees fit to enforce that contract. However, even that is doubtful because he has a right to use his training to support himself. The worst that could come from this is that Golan would be ordered to work for the Bibyians per whatever contract he had with them. Lets assume the worst case scenerio here: Lets say that Golan loses his suit, has to work for the Bibyans for a period of time and has to pay some amount of damages. First, MVEE would NOT HAVE TO PAY ANYTHING! Golan would. It is a personal suit and MVEE has not damaged them in any way! Next, MVEE would continue to make movies, just without Golan for that period of time. Bottom line here is that this suit, even if lost, will not have much effect on MVEE other than what the misleading, incomplete, and conjectured posts of zorro would have you believe ... Any questions?