InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 104
Posts 43471
Boards Moderated 4
Alias Born 02/13/2010

Re: grapeman post# 19789

Thursday, 01/06/2011 5:08:55 PM

Thursday, January 06, 2011 5:08:55 PM

Post# of 23619
Not quite accurate...

Nathan was hired to sue Lanza et al and put the case together, which he did, and a good job of it I might add. Barnett couldn't pay the bill and negotiated a reduced bill along with a percentage of the recovery. The contract was for a reduction of PAST BILLS NOT PAID in return for a % of the Assets/recovery. There was a carry-forward agreement that future billing would be discounted. The fact that there was no future billing because Barnett hired (and didn't pay) another lawyer, Zimmerman, doesn't extinguish the agreement.

(In my opinion from reading the pleadings - IANAL)


I have no humble opinions, but I do have opinions and those are what I express in my posts. BUT...I have been wrong before and likely will be wrong again so do your own research and don't blame me if you are too lazy to do so.