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: BORIS BADENUFF who wrote (22497)	4/15/1999 9:01:00 PM
From: Bill Ulrich	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26163

I'm sure Anti has the answer to that—at least he says does— knows all about the transcripts, I reckon. ______________________________ “I wonder....what was the judge's opinion regarding this thought?”

To: BORIS BADENUFF who wrote (22497)	4/16/1999 8:45:00 AM
From: Janice Shell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26163

The Court responds to Josh Landish. This exchange is from immediate before Montal's comments. Note, by the way, that whatever Spidey and Mikey may want to tell you guys, the injunction has not yet been extended to cover the DTC: 13 what you're asking now to add the Depository Trust Company and 14 Canacord with respect to 4,480,000. That's -- that's what you 15 want me to consider. 16 MR. LANDISH: That's correct, your Honor, because the 17 DTC has the 4 million shares. The DTC's position is those 4 18 million -- whatever they have is free traded. And I believe 19 that we've indicated through the letters of Mr. Sylver and his 20 testimony that they at least had notice. Furthermore the 21 testimony of Mr. Quiel, the restricted securities are still 22 restricted. They can keep their 4 million but the restriction 23 should go back on. So I don't think -- 24 THE COURT: Well, I'll tell you what's terribly 25 troubling to me to start with -- and there are a lot of other ASSOCIATED REPORTERS OF NEVADA (702) 382-8778 246 1 things and I'm not prepared to have you address a motion 2 without getting a far better background -- but we've had 3 admitted a letter from Mr. Sylver that says in effect to Mr. 4 Mann and apparently this letter has been published that he 5 believes these shares are in good standing and subject to -- 6 and not subject to any hold restrictions and -- you know one 7 of the very old, you have to do equity to be entitled to 8 equity. And apparently that's one thing that everybody agrees 9 and especially you feel is incorrect. And the witness that 10 you just called feels clearly that it's incorrect. Now I 11 understand that certain things may have happened that would 12 make that not so. But that seems not to be the motivation for 13 this letter having been sent but I'm not in a position to 14 entertain a motion to dismiss or to deny the relief being 15 sought at this point without you giving me a good deal more. 16 And maybe what you want to be thinking about is the 17 preparation of some tentative findings of fact based upon the 18 testimony that has been received. 19 MR. MONTAL: Your Honor, may I have the Court's 20 indulgence for just a just a few minutes. 21 THE COURT: Well, I'm telling you that I'm not going 22 to rule. I want to be a lot surer about some questions I have 23 in mind. Judge George's response to Montal: 21 THE COURT: Well, let me stop you. I'm -- you're 22 throwing too much at me at the same time. I understand the -- 23 certainly one of the elementary concepts of the issuance of an 24 injunction, it's even more so in a mandatory injunction is the 25 irreparable harm. And if it can be answered with some kind of ASSOCIATED REPORTERS OF NEVADA (702) 382-8778 249 1 legal relief then you don't get the equitable relief. 2 I'm not sure of all of the ramifications that flow from the 3 failure to pay and what that does to stock. I know that stock 4 has some peculiar characteristics and it's wasteful for you to 5 try to make an argument to me now without me having an 6 opportunity to take a look, and counsel as well to respond. 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. As you're aware, earlier in the week I took post #22222 on this thread. I thought you'd like to know that with this message, I'm dedicating my own person post #22222 to AZNT as well. Don't bother to thank me.