InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

SlyOne

11/17/10 8:26 PM

#253998 RE: WithCatz #253990

These are all very good.

Now, we need LAW SCHOOL professors to file their classes objections.

I am just a pinhead. I couldnt produce such fine piece of legal documents.

Cheers All,
sly
icon url

fsshon

11/17/10 8:34 PM

#254005 RE: WithCatz #253990

Thanks Catz. I read Mason and went HUM !!!

"How is it possible the public does not know this stuff?"

icon url

trailblazin

11/17/10 9:47 PM

#254029 RE: WithCatz #253990

wow, simply awesome....kudos to those who took the time to write these letters. The ones you marked as "must read" had me actually laughing out loud at the obvious absurdity of the lack of fairness of this case. Good stuff!!!!
icon url

ptolomeo

11/18/10 3:20 AM

#254086 RE: WithCatz #253990

I think we will get more and more objections filed as we get near the deadline (Nov 19th, 16:00) being Susman's objections the main one (if there's any).

I've got a question.

Are those all objections going to be treated at the confirmation POR hearing or they don't have to? I mean, can anyone file an objection or only the legal representatives are the only ones to be heard.

What about the 'letters'? Do they have any legal weight?

Having seen (at the DS aproval process) what we have seen (none of the +700 objections were treated) do the debtors have to deal with the objections or if the voting process is OK with all the parties GAME OVER???

I would like any legal insight on this...

TIA