InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

up and up

01/13/10 4:31 PM

#137361 RE: rramirez82 #137358

i am aint the sharpest tool in the shed but it
looks like we are gettin real close
icon url

jhdf51

01/13/10 4:35 PM

#137365 RE: rramirez82 #137358

Why am I suspicious of this...could it be the buddy network? We could use a real gun or a squirt gun and Weil chooses the latter.

If this is the case..gonna be interesting to see what kind of juice we get from the fruit when we aren't squeezing hard.
icon url

Reptile

01/13/10 4:41 PM

#137368 RE: rramirez82 #137358

It doesn't make any sense to withdraw any part of it, just use the portions you want when you want.

Why withdraw it? Even if you don't withdraw it you just don't examine or request documents from certain individuals but you have the sword still hanging over their heads if they don't cooperate.

I don't know bankruptcy law but from a pure trial standpoint some of the things they do don't make sense, especially when you have the other side by the cojones...
icon url

rramirez82

01/13/10 4:42 PM

#137369 RE: rramirez82 #137358

Ok, I just printed the document out and I think the caption is a little misleading as this is only a partial withdrawal applying only Moody's, "on the grounds that the Debtors and Moody's have reached a voluntary agreement. The remainder of the motion is not withdrawn and remains on the calendar for the Ombibus hearing scheduled for January 28, 2010."

Moody's already produced documents. Thus, the original motion does not apply to them as they have reached a voluntary agreement for the exchange of information with WMI.
icon url

germanycircus

01/13/10 4:43 PM

#137370 RE: rramirez82 #137358

As far as I can tell, this only let's Moody's off the hook. They merely came to an inside agreement. The squeeze is still on for everyone else.