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 : Amazon Natural (AZNT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (22357)	4/11/1999 1:54:00 PM
From: Janice Shell	Respond to of 26163

Remember how the late lamented (yes REALLY we MISS you!!) Spidey kept going on about the ominous Findings of Fact requested by Judge George? Well, guess who suggested that George ask for them? George makes it clear that he's not yet ready to hand down a ruling, and then Isaac Montal has an idea: ... 7 I understand what you're saying and I think I've raised 8 some of the same questions in the course of these proceedings. 9 But I'm not prepared to rule, counsel, it would be wasting 10 time for me to invite you argue the question. 11 MR. MONTAL: May I suggest something else then, your 12 Honor -- and this is perhaps designed to avoid Mr. Thompson 13 having to make a trip out here -- is for us to have an 14 opportunity to file a written motion which will lay all of 15 this out to the Court based on the current testimony we 16 will -- 17 THE COURT: Well, how soon can you get such a written 18 motion to me? 19 MR. MONTAL: Well, we will get the transcripts and as 20 soon as they're available we will -- we've spoken today about 21 ordering them on an expedited basis and we will 22 cross-reference all of the testimony and the evidence that's 23 before the Court. A~d I think that based upon the evidence 24 that's before the Court there is no basis -- 25 THE COURT: Well, that might be appropriate. Do you ASSOCIATED REPORTERS OF NEVADA (702) 382-8778 250 1 have any problem with that? 2 MR. LANDISH: I don't have any problem with that at 3 all, your Honor. We'd look forward to responding. 4 THE COURT: Okay. Well, how long will it take you to 5 get me something? And if frankly you could do as you've 6 suggested if you could provide something in the nature of 7 findings of fact, and of course the plaintiff do the same kind 8 of thing, and then give me the benefit of law. You tell me 9 when you can get that to me. The point of the whole business, apparently, was to obviate the need for further hearings in the near term.

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (22357)	4/11/1999 2:06:00 PM
From: Janice Shell	Respond to of 26163

Here's something else of interest. Montal's interpretation of what happened: 7 THE COURT: You're saying that this is just a money 8 question. 9 MR. MONTAL: A money case. And that's what every 10 single witness has testified to. Including Mr. Sylver. The 11 testimony is that if the $1 million had been paid at the time 12 that it was supposed to have been paid -- and, your Honor, all 13 we have right now is testimony from the plaintiffs that it 14 hasn't been paid. I don't represent Mr. Mann. I don't know 15 what happened. But the bottom line is it doesn't matter. If 16 the money had been paid these shares would be allowed to be 17 out in the market. There's no question about that. And so 18 what we're talking about is that the plaintiffs decided to 19 make a deal with what, from the testimony we've heard today, 20 has not been the best choice of people to deal with. They've 21 essentially made their own determination to get involved with 22 these people. 23 They knew from as early as February 1997 that 24 Mr. Kricfalusi and everybody that Mr. Kricfalusi has 25 introduced to Amazon based on their testimony has taken them ASSOCIATED REPORTERS OF NEVADA (702) 382-8778 248 1 for a ride for lack of a better word. And then in March of 2 1998 as their expert witness just testified when they told him 3 that they were entering into a 144 transaction with Mr. Mann 4 he said what are you crazy? 5 And on that basis, your Honor, they have decided -- they 6 made the decision that they were going to enter into this 7 transaction. They had fair warning all along that something 8 like this was going to happen. Not just were they aware that 9 this was going to happen, in some regards they participated in 10 it. 11 They issued the letter of May 4, 1998, that your Honor that 12 has referred to. And this went out to the public and their 13 transfer agent which was as a matter of law and as plaintiff 14 has admitted on the stand had said that it is their agent, 15 their agent were the ones that took off the restriction and 16 they did that in reliance on opinion letters from counsel. 17 They didn't do that on their own. There was two separate 18 opinion letters, one from Bondy and Schloss, and one from the 19 firm in Utah. And based upon those letters the restrictions 20 are taken off. And now what we have -- I couldn't agree with him more. What this case SHOULD be about is whether or not Andy Mann paid AZNT one million dollars for four million shares of stock. And nothing else. Not just were they aware that this was going to happen, in some regards they participated in it. In, ah, just how many "regards", I wonder? What was the real plan, lololol? Montal's no dummy. If I were Mikey I'd be wondering just how much he knows that he's not telling.