InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 117
Posts 42234
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 05/16/2011

Re: PRmaniac post# 89233

Saturday, 06/11/2016 8:12:59 AM

Saturday, June 11, 2016 8:12:59 AM

Post# of 130279
I do wonder about the punitive. I know from reading the other court docs that they did request the damages. I think it was the commissioner that was screwed up. Or, as you say, maybe they didn't push.

I call attention to the fact it was a commissioner. I have noticed in other cases, involving Michaels, when a commissioner is involved they make crazy rulings, meaning, rulings that like judgment!

As you point out, the commissioner noted that there was no intent to deliver.

While I almost understand why USAcig wasn't named in the judgment, I am still confused. BUT FOR THE FACT that USAcig existed (as a sub of HPNN) then Smokeless would have never given money to Michaels.

I think that was the other point that should have been argued more strongly.

Wish I had been there to hear the case, at least on the JUDGMENT day wink

Are you playing stupid or is it not an act?
"Beauty fades. Dumb is forever"
"Don't spit on my cupcake and tell me it's frosting"
"Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining"
All said by Judge Judy