The order of the Delaware court appears to me that it requires that the directors Williams and Walsh must be provided all relevant information... not because it specifically directs that to occur, but, by its general direction that clearly requires that both Williams and Walsh are fully and equally entitled to it, under law... until the court allows otherwise.
Particularly as the judge's order clearly allows the audit committee's firings of the company officers to stand... and Walsh was and is a director irrespective of any other conflict...? First, any action taken by the company officers subsequent to the date they were fired, appears it is likely to constitute fraud. And, second, there CANNOT be any justification for withholding information from directors Williams and Walsh that has any purpose OTHER than breaking the law, and violating the judge's orders.
So, NOT providing the information to Williams and Walsh appears that it is incidentally likely to place the former company officers in contempt of the courts order...
Further, the order not only left the firings of the company officers stand, it ALSO imposed a "stand still"... which prevents directors from acting without approval of the judge... or the approval of the other directors in relation to "routine" business.
Turrini and Peirce aren't authorized to do squat without Williams and/or Walsh's approval.
So, it ALSO appears that SUBSEQUENT to the events that we're just now learning of... SOMEONE HAS caused events to occur... that appear they DIRECTLY violate the orders of the Delaware Court.
The "result" of that... apparent in Texas as the wrongful dismissal of the suit against Daic... appears that it is BOTH a fraud practiced on the Texas courts, and a fraud practiced on the Delaware courts...
.JPG)
AI
.JPG)
