Lehman Brothers Financial SA (LEHNQ)

[Joe Stocks]

>>Disagree. The CT's are share of a Trust. Shares of the Trust.
And the Trust is not BK. LBHI is. But, not the Trust. <<

What I am saying is that the Cts are not an obligation of LBHI. They are not in BK. THE Cts are a creditor in the BK. BNY filed the proof of claim.

The CTs have an agreement with LBHI. Just because LBI may be a fully owned sub doesn't mean LBHI 's obligations are also obligations of LBI. The BK proof of claim was filed with the LBHI BK.

>>So why in 2011 would JPM allow their name to be entered?<<

Huh? Their name was on the document back in 2003. Just because it is 2011 doesn't mean that it is no longer name. Again, they references a document in the past between two parties. In the context of how JPM's name was used why and how could they reject??