InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 132
Posts 39819
Boards Moderated 2
Alias Born 12/19/2003

Re: martin33 post# 30774

Wednesday, 07/30/2014 12:03:57 AM

Wednesday, July 30, 2014 12:03:57 AM

Post# of 80454
Unfortunately for MW, RW and the rest of the gang, this court case is about whether or not a contract to repay existed which IFUS has breached by not making repayment. Keep in mind this was a "Convertible Debenture." In every CD loan I've been personally familiar with, if cash payment is not made the loan amount is convertible to shares. Whether this loan was convertible to common shares or Preferred shares, we don't know. But, we will find out. We should know the answer to that already, if only MW/RW were responsible and had filed an 8K or regular reports.

Quite obviously, there is no evidence of tortious interference as, if there was, a lawsuit would have been filed long, long ago alleging that to be the case. Any responsible CEO would have done so. In fact, a CEO's fiduciary responsibility would have required them to do so.

** Bear in mind that relating a fact or facts to a customer which results in the customer severing business ties with another is NOT tortious interference. Just keep that little nugget in the back of your head for future reference.


"Libenter homines id quod volunt credunt"