InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 60
Posts 2594
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 05/28/2008

Re: janice shell post# 46196

Tuesday, 02/14/2017 5:02:30 PM

Tuesday, February 14, 2017 5:02:30 PM

Post# of 54798
I can't disagree with any of your suppositions. But what is particularly perplexing about your explanation is the legal path chosen by COR after it would have become apparent to them that its original theory might not have been accurate. COR has known since the beginning of this debacle that it has a chunk of money coming from Darbie and possibly from Nobilis/Beaufort - to the tune of 1.7 million or so. Maybe there's even an insurance payment on the table. Whatever the remainder of the original 4 million that they still seek doesn't add up to an ongoing legal go ahead from the bean counters who OK these costly proceedings. COR is not a tiny company unaccustomed to litigation - I'm sure someone of substance within the upper echelons of the company is allowing this to proceed 'against the odds'. And I am fascinated as to what that reason might be, because I would agree that on the face of things this case is a non-starter and has been for quite some time. So the only thing I can think of is -- what's in that sealed data.....

On a side note it's a tad curious why Etrade would need more time to respond to COR. After reading NFS's response it didn't seem NFS needed much effort to put it together, just deny everything and make a few affirmative defenses about the culpability and/or involvement of the plaintiff and potentially many others.