Saturday, April 22, 2017 11:04:55 AM
Unless the original judgment against the former sub was obtained by fraud (lying to) the court, I don't see any way to have that judgment set aside at this point, but TTCM doesn't need to have the judgment set aside in order to prevail in this case.
The default against the former sub is useless (an "empty judgment"), unless the complainant is able to enforce against TTCM. TTCM was not a party to the original proceeding against the former sub, and therefore is entitled to raise every defence that the sub could have raised in the original proceeding. In effect, TTCM is entitled to a trial on the merits of the original claim if it is to be found responsible for the obligations of the former sub. TTCM is also entitled to various other defences specific to the cause of action that allows the complainant to try to enforce the default judgment against TTCM in the first place.
The mission to civilize continues. Disclaimer: All of my posted comments are opinion only and should not be construed or relied upon as fact or advice.
Recent TTCM News
- Form 8-K - Current report • Edgar (US Regulatory) • 07/28/2023 07:30:51 PM
VPR Brands LP Reports Record Annual Financial Performance for Fiscal Year 2023 • VPRB • Apr 19, 2024 11:24 AM
Coinllectibles' Subsidiary, Grand Town Development Limited, Acquires Rare Song Dynasty Ceramics Worth Over USD28million • COSG • Apr 18, 2024 8:03 AM
ILUS Provides Form 10-K Filing Update • ILUS • Apr 17, 2024 9:54 AM
Glucotrack Announces Expansion of Its Continuous Glucose Monitoring Technology to Epidural Glucose Monitoring • GCTK • Apr 17, 2024 8:00 AM
Maybacks Global Entertainment To Fire Up 24 New Stations in Louisiana • AHRO • Apr 16, 2024 1:30 PM
Cannabix Technologies Begins Certification of Contactless Alcohol Breathalyzer, Re-Brands product series to Breath Logix • BLOZF • Apr 16, 2024 8:52 AM