Replies to post #55599 on Calypso Wireless (fka CLYW)

[Eli's Gone]

1. I don't believe the judge focused on the settlement as it wasn't an item that Williams brought suit upon---he ruled on the alledged "status quo order" violation. He addressed the settlement in his denial of the "motion to reconsider" only because it was a point brought up that Daic might not cooperate--IMO he left the resolution to the receiver...

2. IMO yes...

IMO Daic should be treated simply as a creditor and a shareholder-the receiver has broad power to investigate any and all claims of creditors and any litigation--this should determine whether Daic' claims are legit and his claims are valid IMO...

see para 8 and 9(ii) here:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/49946173/Calypso%20Order%20Appointing%20Receiver.PDF