InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 86
Posts 4055
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/14/2006

Re: clawmann post# 38111

Saturday, 12/03/2011 11:16:36 PM

Saturday, December 03, 2011 11:16:36 PM

Post# of 42851
Yes, "executory", it was a typo, LOL. Only someone in the legal field would have caught that!

Well, it all started when DIMEQ was classed as 22 in the POR. Then they filed an adversary proceeding against debtor. They had nothing to lose, but all to gain. I do not know how class 12 came up (could be a clause in amended POR) or if it was prayed by DIMEQ in their pleadings.

Debtor and dimeq went to court ordered mediation. It was fruitless or settlement was not enough for DIMEQ to accept.

Now, all of the sudden Rosie put in clause about class 18 in their pleadings, rather that class 12/class 22, if judge finds debtor breach their agreement.

So as of today, it looks like "all or nothing" for them since we are now waiting on a ruling any day now (now really all or nothing, but it depends on the class they end up in).


I do not know the exact time line, but I assume this is pretty close. Note, I am not really following the DIMEQ case closely.

imo

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.