InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 40
Posts 13527
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 03/07/2012

Re: None

Sunday, 08/12/2018 11:49:09 AM

Sunday, August 12, 2018 11:49:09 AM

Post# of 60162

The proper allocation of this refund under the terms of the TAA is a significant—and unresolved—question that should be determined by the bankruptcy court as factfinder in this matter. See CTA10 Rule 40.1(a).

......a little late in the game to bring this up, mr. haynes/SIMON........

.......WHY IN THE WORLD IS THERE A PHONY SIDE ISSUE PRESENTED IN THE APPEAL OF THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT'S DECISION...............gotta divvy up the ITR...............sorry.................and the reality is, no other entity in the TAA paid in taxes....................WTF........and Martinez only ruled that the ITR was the bank's, but that the case should be returned to the BK CT for processing...........that's it......

.....'TROJAN HORSE' pleading at this stage is contemptuous, imo.........it's that footnote 3 that haynes is trying to remove from the record, imo...........................dude better be careful with a trick like this...........AT LEAST THE REQUEST WAS NOT "en banc"........so, the A/CT clerk might just get a judge to say "request denied".............or the court might decide to rehear the mofo............BIZARRE...................

......as with all of western united..................FREAKSHOW and another 6 months of nothing-ness.................................




Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.