Replies to post #56063 on Lehman Brothers Financial SA (LEHNQ)

[DJN]

In cotton's defense that is the way I read it too

[camaro4me]

Yes, we are waiting on feedback from the court.

[Joe Stocks]

The comment that Cotton "misconstrued the claim" did come from JPM and was included in Cotton's "response" to the court. But that is not the point. Camaro said that Cotton's has a claim filed awaiting a court date. Just because someone writes a letter to the court in response to a court order does not mean they have a claim filed. As I said, Cotton has no standing to file a claim.

And it is obvious that Cotton received a reply from the court ( that he did not share with us) whereas he would not have changed his argument stated in his second letter to the court posted here; http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=109453991

Again, another "response" to the court and request to intercede. That is still not the same as a "claim" filed with the court. All that letter is, is a letter to the court. Note that it has not been entered in with a docket number. I am certain that Cotton has received a reply to that letter by now. It would be nice if he would share the court's response so we can put this behind us. As I said, Cotton has no standing intercede in this court case. Only the trustee for the CTs can do that. If he did, that would be like a shareholder for Microsoft , for example, asking to intercede in a court case that Microsoft was a party too. If Cotton or any other shareholder has a problem with how the Cts are being treated, the only legal means to address an action would be for the Ct shareholder to file suit against the CT's trustee.