Dime Bancorp Inc (fka DIMEQ)

[illhonky]

Here are parts I saw from anchor’s motion for reconsideration on Nov. 10th 2004…I switched “the plaintiff” with [anchor]…

“Here, the court previously concluded that [anchor’s] claim for reliance damages, comprised of the net liabilities [anchor] assumed in its supervisory mergers, was barred as a matter of law.”

“The federal circuit has clearly established that [anchor’s] assumed net liabilities are an improper basis for awarding restitution damages.”

“Furthermore, the court’s previous decision concluded that [anchor] had failed, as a matter of law, to provide sufficient evidence to prove that its assumed net liabilities or its post-acquisition loss models reflect actual, out-of-pocket costs.”

I’m sure you guys have already read this. I’m not saying that I know anything about DIMEZ, because I don’t. Is this the same trial though, that we are awiating a big payout from? or does DIMEZ have a completely separate trial that I am not seeing? Because so far it seems messy…. and long.