(Total Views: 544)
Posted On: 02/18/2022 2:52:51 AM
Post# of 154253
Re: Cassandra X #118539
The Fife deal was for convertible notes.
Since the actual sale wouldn't take place until conversion it would pertain only to those shares converted one year prior to any lawsuit and would void future conversions. At a minimum I would think that the money loaned by Fife would be due them. Since the contract would be void the past interest and penalties could be clawed back. Whether the extra shares by Fife or money obtained for them by Fife that were awarded to Fife in the lawsuit filed by them and adjudicated by the court could be returned is an interesting question.
Quote:
that no contract shall be deemed to be void by reason of this subsection in any action maintained in reliance upon this subsection, by any person to or for whom any broker or dealer sells, or from or for whom any broker or dealer purchases, a security in violation of any rule or regulation prescribed pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (c) of section 78o of this title, unless such action is brought within one year after the discovery that such sale or purchase involves such violation and within three years after such violation.
Since the actual sale wouldn't take place until conversion it would pertain only to those shares converted one year prior to any lawsuit and would void future conversions. At a minimum I would think that the money loaned by Fife would be due them. Since the contract would be void the past interest and penalties could be clawed back. Whether the extra shares by Fife or money obtained for them by Fife that were awarded to Fife in the lawsuit filed by them and adjudicated by the court could be returned is an interesting question.
(3)
(0)
