It may actually be worse for Gary Zagami because I
Post# of 72440
Posted On: 07/18/2016 12:04:23 AM
It may actually be worse for Gary Zagami because I think it may be illegal for Rosen to cover Zagami's liability. The law firm can take a case on a contingent fee basis, but they cannot in any way pay someone to be a client. So I'm pretty sure that Rosen's assumption of the client's liability would be considered illegal consideration. Zagami may find himself way out on a limb all by himself that Sullivan is in the process of cutting off. And even though Nancy M dropped her complaint, she may still be on the hook also.
Zagami owned such a small amount of CTIX stock. If he ends up in bankruptcy because he agreed to be the plaintiff for Rosen's lawsuit, then IMO, that would be exactly what he deserves. Karma, in spades...
If Rosen paid damages on behalf of Zagami for a cause of action brought by CTIX based on the frivolous lawsuit, I believe that may well be deemed illegal compensation. And I do not believe that Nancy M's withdrawal of her complaint fully insulates her from liability. It is certainly a mitigating factor. However, she was the first plaintiff and a case can be made that the damage began by that complaint continues to this day. Keep in mind that since Ms. Nancy is no longer a party to the lawsuit, I see no reason why Sullivan cannot already be communicating directly with her. I would be surprised if Sullivan hasn't already interviewed her. Mr. Zagami and Ms. Nancy could end up as the star witnesses for Sullivan and CTIX. That might be very interesting.
Rosen is who I ultimately hope will be held liable and Rosen has (I assume) liability insurance and other assets.
Zagami owned such a small amount of CTIX stock. If he ends up in bankruptcy because he agreed to be the plaintiff for Rosen's lawsuit, then IMO, that would be exactly what he deserves. Karma, in spades...
If Rosen paid damages on behalf of Zagami for a cause of action brought by CTIX based on the frivolous lawsuit, I believe that may well be deemed illegal compensation. And I do not believe that Nancy M's withdrawal of her complaint fully insulates her from liability. It is certainly a mitigating factor. However, she was the first plaintiff and a case can be made that the damage began by that complaint continues to this day. Keep in mind that since Ms. Nancy is no longer a party to the lawsuit, I see no reason why Sullivan cannot already be communicating directly with her. I would be surprised if Sullivan hasn't already interviewed her. Mr. Zagami and Ms. Nancy could end up as the star witnesses for Sullivan and CTIX. That might be very interesting.
Rosen is who I ultimately hope will be held liable and Rosen has (I assume) liability insurance and other assets.
Quote:
...FWIW, the Complainant would be first on the list to be liable for damages...theoretically Gary Z brought the suit...and I'm guessing he may not be in a position to pay off. I don't know if they can chase Rosen for damages for litigating on behalf of his client. - loanranger
(2)
(0)Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (IPIX) Stock Research Links
Scroll down for more posts ▼