InvestorsHub Logo

clawmann

10/19/16 1:04 PM

#465400 RE: goldcanyon341 #465398

I am not so optimistic yet. There is a question as to whether the LT has a duty to appeal the dismissal. I don't think so, but I am not the LT's counsel. I believe a duty to appeal might arise if there is a likelihood that the appeal would succeed. And it's the LT's counsel's job to determine whether there is such a likelihood.

mattchew

10/19/16 1:25 PM

#465404 RE: goldcanyon341 #465398

Definitely one step closer to closing out this BK!
End of the month should be very telling.

Donotunderstand

10/19/16 2:44 PM

#465432 RE: goldcanyon341 #465398

agree 90%

I think there is about 5-10 million in claims between PIERS and Equity (higher than PIERS creditors who were partially paid off before PIERS and who get finished at this point)

Yes there would need to be an LTI and then an LTI with a dollar amount ..........such was the progression for PIERS

I can think of no reason that the escrows are separate from the LTI ... with LTI being closer to money

If the dollar value of the LTI (interest (I) in the LT) is not available - that can be

But why there would be an interest in (LTI) and escrow marker for the same trust - is beyond me (although I am not an 11 attorney)