Thanks LocWolf. As I have posted earlier, I don't see how the VennWest case can continue at this point. The onus was upon VennWest to surmount the high legal bar by showing just cause that the defendants failed to follow ethical standards and established legal protocols while dealing with one financial crisis after another in order to avert bankruptcy. The coup de gras, in my opinion, is that when voting on whether or not to accept the loan proposals offered by McGovern and Dengler, all parties who would have had a conflict of interest, abstained from voting. Also, McGovern's loan terms were more favorable than Venning's, however, Venning never even submitted a formal loan proposal. Add to that the fact that McGovern could have taken personal possession of HDC's SVM-RFE patents (as this IP was put up as collateral in the loan documents) when HDC defaulted in it's timely repayment in accordance with the loan terms. Instead, McGovern extended the repayment schedule to keep HDC from being in default. And there is more, however, from my perspective, it is going to be a steep uphill battle for VennWest to establish the merits of its case in the face of all of these compelling facts. JMHO.
Bullish
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
