the following suggests 1 of the ways longs could still see some value from their shares,which last i looked were .000001-didnt think that was possible
also,since there has been no bankruptcy,where shares would normally be disposed of, compensation or not, and our shares thus still exist,it remains to be seen what would happen to our shares under a new concession lessee
normally arbitration would be finished by now and arbitration doesn't usually require a judge but sometimes a judge pro tem could be used -i'm not familiar w san diego county usage in that matter-so i dont know why arbitration like everything else is still hanging,but the Obama administration,by executive order or cajole etc, appropriated many border county judges to facilitate his amnesty of countless illegals backlogged in the system-San Diego is on the border
and as I've said below there is always the problem of enforcing a judgement once obtained
Posted On: 09/08/2013 9:51:09 PM
Avatar
Posted By: microcaps
Re: Nostradamus2012 #5021
EXCEPT for 1st couple pages and exhibits this is CWRN's complaint-I'll probably have to go back to April and pick up 1st 2 pages of complaint
Other than sec 32 I really havent thought about it, so my thinking unfolds as i write, as it usually does
Short answer-in USA,under present system judges are a law unto themselves and whatever they decide no matter how many statutes or court rules are violated has been the law.
This is an action by CWRN and Bob as past CEO/ Shirley as then new CWRN Ceo and Sharon as Pres of sub PanAm against Geo based on JVA between CWRN and Geo
so its not a stockholder action and stockholders are not directly represented,so it does not specifically ask for anything on behalf of stock holders-who are not plaintiffs but if the judge decided stockholders suffered due to Geos [and the baja 30's] alleged actions in sec 32 immediately below, the judge could order those damages to be paid to stock holders in relation to the amount of shares they had at a certain time of record.
it could be decided that other actual damages in the form of Geo allegedly withholding millions should be prorated to stockholders also
but officers are not acting in their personal private citizen status but as officers of a public company w shareholders,so what duty do they have to stockholders under which the judge would grant a portion of the judgment, other than the up to possibly 5.3 million Geo might have made off of selling stock in violation of any agreement w CWRN??????
I havent added up the punitive damages
count 1 complaint asks 10 M (million) for each # (plaintiff-Bob sharon shirley Cwrn or PanAm) against each defendant(^) -Geo, jimmy ,TMJ etc -there are also the baja 30 john and jane does
count 2 asks 5M for EACH # against EACH ^(defendant)
count 3 5M ...same as above " "
count 4 5M ......................
5 undetermined
6 ca 1.2 million actual
7 each # 5M agst each ^
sec 81 treble damages under RICO
8 RICO actual 1.5Mplus, plus each # 5M agst each ^ plus att fees and costs
9 each # 5M agst each ^
10 trust
11 each # 5M agst each ^
12 injunctive relief
13 asks Geo required to account for all monies
even discounting the infamous baja 30, these could add up to 100's of millions actual and punitive damages but are usually maximum statutory etc amounts,and of course the problem of collecting
sec 31 and 48 Bob et al begin asking for amounts,including punitive damages of 5-10 million on some of the 13 causes of action
The following section is of special interest to stockholders
32. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that GEOTECH has sold the CWRN common
18 stock provided to GEOTECH as security for its investment for sums possibly greater than the
19 total amount of defendants' investment in the Joint Venture. Moreover, the warrant/option
20 obtained by defendants as additional security for the investment, which was redeemed by
21 Defendants at $0.005 per share, traded between May 5, 2010 and April 6, 2011, at between
22 approximately $0.005 at start and up to over $0.0265 per share. The potential return to
23 Defendants from trading 150,000,000 shares of CWRN common stock that was to be held as
24 security for the invested funds, if traded at $0.0265 per share, could have provided
25 $5,300,000.00 to Defendants. Plaintiffs have requested an accounting from Defendants
26 regarding any CWRN shares that were sold by Defendants, but Defendants have failed and
27 refused to provide such an accounting.
28
13. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges: TMT GLOBAL, JWT
TRADING, GEOTECH, MUI and YEE are and at all times relevant have been alter egos of
each other, there is and at all times relevant was a unity of interest and ownership among them,
they commingled funds, they disregarded corporate formalities and separateness, the entities
were undercapitalized for their purposes and activities, they passed monies back and forth
between accounts and diverted funds from one entity to the other, and from each entity to each
person, and it would constitute an injustice for this Court not to disregard the separateness of
each.
14. Plaintiff is informed and believe and thereon alleges: at all times alleged herein,
each of the defendants was the agent, principal, affiliate, representative, co-venturer, co-conspirator,
joint venturer, alter ego and/or partner of each of the other defendants, and in doing
the acts hereinafter alleged, was acting within the scope of such relationship and with the
permission, consent and/or ratification of his, her or its co-defendants.
15. Defendants, and each of them, formed, conceived and operated a conspiracy
against Plaintiffs, and each of them. Said Defendants committed the acts alleged herein in
furtherance of their common design.
16. Plaintiff does not know the names, capacities, or bases of liability of the
defendants sued as Does 1 through 30....
17. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges: at all times mentioned,
each of the defendants, including Does 1 through 30, inclusive, was and now is the agent....
also,since there has been no bankruptcy,where shares would normally be disposed of, compensation or not, and our shares thus still exist,it remains to be seen what would happen to our shares under a new concession lessee
normally arbitration would be finished by now and arbitration doesn't usually require a judge but sometimes a judge pro tem could be used -i'm not familiar w san diego county usage in that matter-so i dont know why arbitration like everything else is still hanging,but the Obama administration,by executive order or cajole etc, appropriated many border county judges to facilitate his amnesty of countless illegals backlogged in the system-San Diego is on the border
and as I've said below there is always the problem of enforcing a judgement once obtained
Posted On: 09/08/2013 9:51:09 PM
Avatar
Posted By: microcaps
Re: Nostradamus2012 #5021
EXCEPT for 1st couple pages and exhibits this is CWRN's complaint-I'll probably have to go back to April and pick up 1st 2 pages of complaint
Other than sec 32 I really havent thought about it, so my thinking unfolds as i write, as it usually does
Short answer-in USA,under present system judges are a law unto themselves and whatever they decide no matter how many statutes or court rules are violated has been the law.
This is an action by CWRN and Bob as past CEO/ Shirley as then new CWRN Ceo and Sharon as Pres of sub PanAm against Geo based on JVA between CWRN and Geo
so its not a stockholder action and stockholders are not directly represented,so it does not specifically ask for anything on behalf of stock holders-who are not plaintiffs but if the judge decided stockholders suffered due to Geos [and the baja 30's] alleged actions in sec 32 immediately below, the judge could order those damages to be paid to stock holders in relation to the amount of shares they had at a certain time of record.
it could be decided that other actual damages in the form of Geo allegedly withholding millions should be prorated to stockholders also
but officers are not acting in their personal private citizen status but as officers of a public company w shareholders,so what duty do they have to stockholders under which the judge would grant a portion of the judgment, other than the up to possibly 5.3 million Geo might have made off of selling stock in violation of any agreement w CWRN??????
I havent added up the punitive damages
count 1 complaint asks 10 M (million) for each # (plaintiff-Bob sharon shirley Cwrn or PanAm) against each defendant(^) -Geo, jimmy ,TMJ etc -there are also the baja 30 john and jane does
count 2 asks 5M for EACH # against EACH ^(defendant)
count 3 5M ...same as above " "
count 4 5M ......................
5 undetermined
6 ca 1.2 million actual
7 each # 5M agst each ^
sec 81 treble damages under RICO
8 RICO actual 1.5Mplus, plus each # 5M agst each ^ plus att fees and costs
9 each # 5M agst each ^
10 trust
11 each # 5M agst each ^
12 injunctive relief
13 asks Geo required to account for all monies
even discounting the infamous baja 30, these could add up to 100's of millions actual and punitive damages but are usually maximum statutory etc amounts,and of course the problem of collecting
sec 31 and 48 Bob et al begin asking for amounts,including punitive damages of 5-10 million on some of the 13 causes of action
The following section is of special interest to stockholders
32. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that GEOTECH has sold the CWRN common
18 stock provided to GEOTECH as security for its investment for sums possibly greater than the
19 total amount of defendants' investment in the Joint Venture. Moreover, the warrant/option
20 obtained by defendants as additional security for the investment, which was redeemed by
21 Defendants at $0.005 per share, traded between May 5, 2010 and April 6, 2011, at between
22 approximately $0.005 at start and up to over $0.0265 per share. The potential return to
23 Defendants from trading 150,000,000 shares of CWRN common stock that was to be held as
24 security for the invested funds, if traded at $0.0265 per share, could have provided
25 $5,300,000.00 to Defendants. Plaintiffs have requested an accounting from Defendants
26 regarding any CWRN shares that were sold by Defendants, but Defendants have failed and
27 refused to provide such an accounting.
28
13. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges: TMT GLOBAL, JWT
TRADING, GEOTECH, MUI and YEE are and at all times relevant have been alter egos of
each other, there is and at all times relevant was a unity of interest and ownership among them,
they commingled funds, they disregarded corporate formalities and separateness, the entities
were undercapitalized for their purposes and activities, they passed monies back and forth
between accounts and diverted funds from one entity to the other, and from each entity to each
person, and it would constitute an injustice for this Court not to disregard the separateness of
each.
14. Plaintiff is informed and believe and thereon alleges: at all times alleged herein,
each of the defendants was the agent, principal, affiliate, representative, co-venturer, co-conspirator,
joint venturer, alter ego and/or partner of each of the other defendants, and in doing
the acts hereinafter alleged, was acting within the scope of such relationship and with the
permission, consent and/or ratification of his, her or its co-defendants.
15. Defendants, and each of them, formed, conceived and operated a conspiracy
against Plaintiffs, and each of them. Said Defendants committed the acts alleged herein in
furtherance of their common design.
16. Plaintiff does not know the names, capacities, or bases of liability of the
defendants sued as Does 1 through 30....
17. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges: at all times mentioned,
each of the defendants, including Does 1 through 30, inclusive, was and now is the agent....
