InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

carlos43

11/23/10 2:10 PM

#39361 RE: litton51 #39360

I see the denial as being a moot point after Daic/Williamson dropped the "Turnover Provision "from their claim. I fully expected the Judge to deny the request because of that. Other than the formality of signing the order, to me nothing has changed. I see us moving forward with our case. IMO we will use the 90 day state case stay to sharpen our case and be ready to go if necessary. I think that the willingness to "give up" the Turnover provision on Daic`s part indicated that there may be a good chance for settlement and I still believe that. As the weak hands head for the exits, I,like you will sieze the opportunity to strengthen my position.

At this point I see no reason for the Judge to recuse himself. If we do go to trial a jury will decide the outcome. IMO the Judge could not legally strike enough evidence to cause a jury to side with DD/Williamson! We will see soon! Happy Thanksgiving to All!
icon url

Chicorumba

11/23/10 2:10 PM

#39362 RE: litton51 #39360

Here's an interesting connection, not to imply anything -
DD International, Inc. provides offshore inspection services to include underwater inspections. One of their clients is Transocean. Transocean is the owner of the Deepwater Horizon - does the name ring a bell? I'm not insinuating anything, just pointing out the customer-client relationship.
Thanks for the info litton51