InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 0
Posts 18
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 12/17/2011

Re: drrugby post# 2569

Thursday, 12/22/2011 6:09:39 AM

Thursday, December 22, 2011 6:09:39 AM

Post# of 60062
According to the filings on the docket, Bancorp was provided a complete administrative record way back in June. And the bank has been completely liquidated in the interim. It does not appear that time was really of the essence, it looks just like Bancorp's lawyers have been extracting maximum fees from their client, squabbling about nothing.

For example, the sum total of what the Bancorp asked for in their discovery requests were duplicate copies of the documents they already received and which their lawyers already had.

If there was a basis to overturn the receivership, they would have made an appropriate motion once they received the record in June. Complaining about unnamed documents that the lawyers cannot even describe is not a winning litigation play.

So the fact is, I am right, you cannot identify a single point in the litigation where the government asked to delay the proceedings. The delay has all come from the Bancorp's lawyers' own tactics of requesting duplicate copies of what they already had.
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.