InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 298
Posts 29914
Boards Moderated 4
Alias Born 03/06/2012

Re: A deleted message

Friday, 04/29/2016 1:18:28 AM

Friday, April 29, 2016 1:18:28 AM

Post# of 238042
I'm not defending MJNA. MJNA has plenty of issues. Just stating nothing in that lawsuit is earth shattering. It is known, and has been for years that Llamas is a controlling shareholder in companies that own a majority stake in MJNA. He has majority shareholder voting power and as such can appointment members to the BOD to represent his interests. Nothing unusual there. As far as MJNA, General Hemp etc companies that are invested in one another (and major shareholders) do lend each other money from time to time. A long as it is properly accounted for it isn't an issue. (Is MJNA, General Hemp etc properly accounting for it, that is a different story.) Was this lady fired just for being pregnant? I don't know but it seems unlikely. There has to be more to the story. There was probably other issues that lead to her getting fired and it just happened to be the day she told them she was pregnant. If her being pregnant is truly the main reason for her being fired, then it is just plain wrong and she deserves to be compensated. Also the only reason her lawyers bring up the mixing of money between companies is legal tactic so she can sue not just the company she was officially employed with but an attempt to add on the other companies too

Just saying it is hard to take the allegations of a disgruntled ex employee at face value without seeing the evidence (or lack thereof) from the defense.




All posts are my opinion only. Do your DD.