Replies to post #233669 on Green Energy Enterprises Inc. (GYOG)

[Montana Wildhack]

Thanks Investman - that's what I thought too but you have stated it so much better!

[joecanouse]

remember this when the facts about mineseeker come out; there exists a tortios interference but your looking in the wrong place

[BLTN]

Thank you for an excellent post. The 'tortious interference' began in January with the meeting and subsequent filing to remove Mr. DiGenova as CEO. The meeting, as we now know, was conducted illegally (no shareholder notice NOR the voting rights to take such action) AND cost QASP shareholders a merger with Centaflix.

The pps dropped from .0029 to as low as .0012. When the opportunity for QASP shareholders came about to possibly exchange their shares with NHSH, the company Centaflix has signed a LOI to merge into, the pps of QASP began to rise and got as high as .0024.

What happens next you ask? Another meeting to not only name a new CEO, change the management structure of QASP, CREATE the voting rights that would have been needed in January to remove Mr. DiGenova, and to strip shareholders of any rights of notice or voting power.

The pps has dropped to .0017 and there are those touting how hopeless it is for QASP shareholders as if that's something any decent person ought to be celebrating.

These are indisputable facts at this point. One can only imagine what we don't know. GLTU

[crazy horse 0]

Investman432 excellent summary. The Grand Jury

will see exactly the intentions of Joe C .We may even find out other parties involved with Joe C that have caused damaged to us Legal QASP shareholders. Yet JOE C claims to be the CEO and working in the Shareholders best interest./b]

Its clear to me Joe's interference has materially damaged QASP shareholders by delaying and complicating the business opportunity with Centaflix. No question he can be personally liable of tortious interference. Tortfeasor Joe - has a ring to it.

Tortious interference, also known as Intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of tort, occurs when a person intentionally damages the plaintiff's contractual or other business relationships. This tort is broadly divided into two categories, one specific to contractual relationships (irrespective of whether they involve business), and the other specific to business relationships or activities (irrespective of whether they involve a contract).

Tortious interference with contract rights can occur where the tortfeasor convinces a party to breach the contract against the plaintiff, or where the tortfeasor disrupts the ability of one party to perform his obligations under the contract, thereby preventing the plaintiff from receiving the performance promised. The hardcore instance of this tort occurs when one party induces another party to breach a contract with a third party, in circumstances where the first party has no privilege to act as it does and acts with knowledge of the existence of the contract. Such conduct is termed tortious inducement of breach of contract.

Tortious interference with business relationships occurs where the tortfeasor acts to prevent the plaintiff from successfully establishing or maintaining business relationships. This tort may occur when a first party's conduct intentionally causes a second party not to enter into a business relationship with a third party that otherwise would probably have occurred. Such conduct is termed tortious interference with prospective business relations, expectations, or advantage or with prospective economic advantage.