Climber, nice heartfelt post, but……
".......First it’s clear to me that this debtor has been investigated to death and I’m sure that even the most experienced and talented examiner that the UST could appoint would NOT “find any stone unturned.” ............."
I hope she is saying the dirt has been discovered…put it in front of me so that I have something to rule on. Where have any of the facts of a solvent company been put in front of the judge by the EC in open court? I think the judge is getting frustrated with the ongoing time and nothing put in front of her. All we have heard from is Rosen, he seems to be the only one that is making a numbers statement which we all know is stuck on A<L. Susman, granted he just came on board, put Willingham on the stand to ask about the shares he held, but that in itself won’t get the job done and hopefully he will have some meat and potatoes at the next hearing. We do not know how long before Solomon makes his figures known, but I at least hope Susman can put forth something in open court that shows the illegal nature of this act.
"..........I don’t think it is fair to the creditors in this case, to be saddled with the costs of an investigation into systemic problems that would only benefit
future parties, but not benefit the parties in this case........"
This paragraph above confuses me. Who are the creditors she is referring to, is it the shareholders or those that hired Weil? Who are the future parties, is it the shareholders she is referring to here or is it those that will benefit by getting the shares in a new company if this POR is signed off on? “But not benefit the parties in this case…..” , again who is she referring to…..I assume it to be those that hired Weil, but I do not know. Any clarification would be appreciated.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
