wsa court decision, page-19

It took me a while to digest the court transcript but between this and the recent court decision if the defendents cannot prove that there was some form of real consideration given for the CHM cash taken then they would have to be worried.

MMX last wording in their release has changed again and now they are talking about no claim for a substantial interest in the IO assets.

Read like it was setting up for a loss to me.

The size of the penalty in the last case is what I found most interesting as like this case the value of the assets has grown enourmously since the questionable transactions took place and the judge has set damages at todays values.

That is if CHM win they should have enjoyed the same ride as MMX.

I bet we get the old chestnut of "if I loaned someone money and they won the lottery ..."

Before you throw that one up spend some time reading up on fiduciary duties and what this implies as Barnes was a director and Grimaldi is alledged to be a de facto director of CHM.

Role on september