Replies to post #106241 on Pacific Gold Corp fka PCFG

[blue dog]

I have done some corporate work on when a cause of action lies with the shareholder and when it lies with the corporation, but that work was not in New Jersey or whatever state it was where these transaction took place. (I am licensed in California and DC.) If you think that you have a cause of action against Yorkville, BME, Cornell, and possibly PCFG, you should obtain counsel to evaluate and preserve those rights. I am happy to post the doings in the PCFG litigation, but I draw the line there.

The GM travesty, by contrast, is a public-affairs scandal in my opinion. I wish that the bondholders had had the courage to sue, as their treatment violated the rule of law on which this country is (or used to be) based. The difference between the GM and PCFG situations is the involvement of government. I would love to see more (and post more) on that: what are the appropriate boards?

Keep them coming!!!

http://client-email.com/dockets/PCFG/PCFG%20Doc%20057.pdf

Just now getting to the interesting part in all this!!! Stay tuned.

At this point is there anything Past/Present shareholders need to do to preserve their rights against Yorkville, BME, Cornell, and possibly PCG?

P.S. Also I would like your thoughts on the the way GM was handled with bondholders. The former CEO of AIG has filed a claim that may be related. (respond to the appropriate boards)

[Phred6]

Interesting reading. The situation is so bad that Shylock laywers don't want to sue PCFG anymore. \V/_