InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 313
Posts 52282
Boards Moderated 14
Alias Born 08/19/2009

Re: None

Wednesday, 08/07/2013 11:15:01 AM

Wednesday, August 07, 2013 11:15:01 AM

Post# of 141709
Talked to my lawyer friend who reviewed this case to get his comments on the recent ruling on the dismissal.

"Regarding the judge’s ruling, the judge determined that some aspects of the currently asserted claims could not have been included in the prior settlement agreement (based on the timing of the relevant events), so she is allowing the case to go forward rather than dismissing it as a dispute that has already been resolved. Her ruling does not indicate the plaintiffs’ tortious interference claims have any substantive merit. It just means that the claims were not subject to immediate dismissal."

Nothing new, but a different phrasing that may be easier to understand.

I do have two thoughts of my own regarding this whole issue:

1) Governor Quinn and other politicians had high hopes for the Illinois charging infrastructure. They spent many taxpayer dollars and took much PR mileage from it. The system was never finished and the ones that were installed are in disrepair and it is unclear as to who owns them. This is an embarrassment to the state and its politicians. A highly visible embarrassment. It simply cannot NOT be addressed and quickly.



2) I guess this one is for Brian. Rather than drag this thing out, is a settlement not possible? If this drags out much longer, the existing chargers may be worthless. How is this: CCGI gets the charging network ownership. JNSH gets to install the balance of the chargers on the government contract and has an exclusive maintenance agreement for all the chargers in the Chicago network?

Anyone have any thoughts on this?