News Focus
News Focus
icon url

tturner617

10/01/09 7:41 PM

#222864 RE: janice shell #222859

My brother-in-law promised to pay me back the 20 bucks I gave him too, that was 20 years ago.
icon url

SDBob09

10/01/09 7:42 PM

#222866 RE: janice shell #222859

I agree, something "happened", and by reading these docs it was personal. These guys aren't having coffee and crumpets together any longer.
icon url

happyguy72

10/01/09 7:45 PM

#222869 RE: janice shell #222859

though, according to the claims, the money was hands off until the shares were delivered...

oops.

icon url

albus

10/01/09 7:46 PM

#222871 RE: janice shell #222859

if they promise to send money back asap then why need alternative financing to pay the money -- if they have the money in escrow then interplead it into the court to avoid appearence of fraud and let judge or fedeal magistrate decide --they do not have money -- but i bet they dilute, if they have enough volume to get money to pay it to the court or federal referee

this one is in spng favor - though you are right, something happen and that is an important part of this
icon url

xDREWx

10/01/09 7:47 PM

#222873 RE: janice shell #222859

I actually know a bit about contract law. Interestingly enough - the spending of the money counts as much as any signature as an acceptance of term. Specifically the law applies to the cashing of a check. Delivery for consideration is the only thing missing : breach of contract.

(obviously an extremely simple take)