InvestorsHub Logo

rramirez82

11/09/10 1:25 PM

#251732 RE: SlyOne #251728

They must raise the question (and challenge the examiner's contrary opinion) of whether the estate is receiving adequate consideration for the release of the claims. If they are not, then those claims are in fact being abandoned for the purposes of Hoffman's request.

We need to see the PJS numbers.

fsshon

11/09/10 2:38 PM

#251748 RE: SlyOne #251728

Sly.. WMI can not legally trade down the claim, if there is a reasonable chance they can win it and increase the value of the estate. per the 554 rule the UST can not let this claim "just be cancelled."

Collyer stated in her order that is attached, the BK court can determine the assets of the estate, but her court must determine the outcome of the claim. Not the BK court, she never gave the BK court the right to adjudicate this claim, only the right to determine the assets of the estate

WMI/UST can not legally withdraw this claim, if the claim could be of value to the estate. Need to re-read this letter from Hoffman to the court..Only inconsequential to the estate, Hochberg's report has no bearing on Collyer's court.

Once again we will Support this one as wamufight + united, plus any other group that wants to come in and fight this valuation.

You know what I am getting at with this.. These are eventually going to be Motions.

If you want to discuss it privately, just send an email to my wamufight adddress..

wamufight@gamil.com

Thanks

~Don~