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.
Avant Technologies and Ainnova Tech Form Joint Venture to Advance Early Disease Detection Using Artificial Intelligence • AVAI • Nov 12, 2024 9:00 AM
Swifty Global Announces Launch of Swifty Sports IE, Expanding Sports Betting and Casino Services in the Irish Market • DRCR • Nov 12, 2024 9:00 AM
Oohvie App Update Enhances Women's Health with Telemedicine and Online Scheduling • HLYK • Nov 11, 2024 8:00 AM
SANUWAVE Announces Record Quarterly Revenues: Q3 FY2024 Financial Results • SNWV • Nov 8, 2024 7:07 AM
DBG Pays Off $1.3 Million in Convertible Notes, which Retires All of the Company's Convertible Notes • DBGI • Nov 7, 2024 2:16 PM
SMX and FinGo Enter Into Collaboration Mandate to Develop a Joint 'Physical to Digital' Platform Service • SMX • Nov 7, 2024 8:48 AM