![](https://investorshub.advfn.com/uicon/158678.png?cb=1661594561)
Saturday, April 06, 2013 11:39:55 AM
I wonder if The Defendant would consider the difference between being "prohibited", which in EVERY case means permanently, or banned for 5 years to be a "minor ambiguity".
The final judgment was flawed and it was signed by the judge. It wasn't a small thing....this so-called "minor ambiguity" rendered the judgment unenforceable. It was WRONG.
Is there some concern that acknowledging his mistake might have a deleterious effect on his disposition in the other case involving The Defendant?
1:12-cv-10495-MLW Grampp v. Bordynuik et al
Mark L. Wolf, presiding
It's morally wrong to allow a sucker to keep his money.......Cuthbert J. Twillie
Glidelogic Corp. Becomes TikTok Shop Partner, Opening a New Chapter in E-commerce Services • GDLG • Jul 5, 2024 7:09 AM
Freedom Holdings Corporate Update; Announces Management Has Signed Letter of Intent • FHLD • Jul 3, 2024 9:00 AM
EWRC's 21 Moves Gaming Studios Moves to SONY Pictures Studios and Green Lights Development of a Third Upcoming Game • EWRC • Jul 2, 2024 8:00 AM
BNCM and DELEX Healthcare Group Announce Strategic Merger to Drive Expansion and Growth • BNCM • Jul 2, 2024 7:19 AM
NUBURU Announces Upcoming TV Interview Featuring CEO Brian Knaley on Fox Business, Bloomberg TV, and Newsmax TV as Sponsored Programming • BURU • Jul 1, 2024 1:57 PM
Mass Megawatts Announces $220,500 Debt Cancellation Agreement to Improve Financing and Sales of a New Product to be Announced on July 11 • MMMW • Jun 28, 2024 7:30 AM