Worldwide NFT Inc (WNFT)

[Yolo]

The shares were cancelled because the judge approved the share cancellation in the lower court...TWICE!

Does this argument seem persuasive?

It seems to rely on a belief that district judges are infallible and never ever wrong, and that appellate courts weren't created specifically to verify that the district court followed the law properly.


I don't care what the judge ruled or whether he clapped himself on the back and affirmed to himself that he made the right decision. All I'm interested in is whether it was actually the correct legal decision.

And I just gave a data point showing that it isn't a sound legal decision; the shareholder was never served, but the shares were canceled two weeks after failed attempt at service anyway.