good discussion of several points: A little confusion though.
1. --Nothing in the first release moved the needle closer to any verdict supporting any plaintiff action. Yes, it did. The documents have moved Sweeney to release 11,000 more.
2. --Of course there is legal precedent for document content to remain under seal in other cases, but there is no way the Kodak case action can be read as related to the Fairholme case. Yes, we may get to know about what gets released to Sweeney. But, we may not.
3.How could you conclude that Docugate is blown way out of proportion, that there is nothing lurking in the closet of secrecy, and that motive is not important. Why then would Sweeny compel light to be shined on 11,000 more documents?
Contrarily speaking, you do expect some sort of government recoil from the order to compel from Sweeney. Right. I sure hope so.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
