It is possible, but highly unlikely, that the BK will hear arguments on fraudulent conveyance. I and my shares hope that the court will hear arguments if someone files on this issue.
Keep in mind that we have gone 18 months without anyone filing on this issue.
I would like for DavidWest to explain the principle of "fraudulent conveyance" as it relates to the so-called "corporate veil". In David's argument, it seems as if he is putting the proverbial "cart before the horse" with the corporate veil immunities. To me, a proof of fraudulent conveyance would have a priori status in this case.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
