If a lower court issues an order which violates federal law, the proper thing to do is submit some kind of evidence, any evidence, that informs the court of the conflict. In this case, the judge is merely enforcing a DE law. When asked by the judge to get her an opinion letter from any attorney explaining why enforcing DE violated federal law, marty's formidable lawyer could not find one lawyer in the entire country. So while paula and marty believe the order violates federal law (which one, by the way?), no lawyer agrees with them. In fact, a former Division Chief at the SEC in charge of enforcement, stated clearly that the order was legal and did not violate any federal law or SEC reg. If there was a federal law in conflict, why didn't marty's lawyer point that out? Is he incompetent? Now marty can appeal and spend a few grand. But what's he's going to tell the appellate court? paula nelson assures me this order is illegal so please dismiss it? No, I can't point out any specific law or reg, but paula told me it was so. Yea, that will impress the appellate judges. Of course, marty can simply ignore the order. That should open up a few interesting possibilities, none of which marty will enjoy, IMO. Of course, marty can always settle, but I suspect the price
has gone up since his comments about Wallace's father.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
