Buddyboy: It's not surprising that NSF would be in
Post# of 153822
(Total Views: 564)
Posted On: 11/15/2021 11:37:20 AM
Re: Buddyboy20 #110509
Buddyboy: It's not surprising that NSF would be involved with settlement negotiations as NSF has a significant investment in Amarex, but that doesn't necessarily mean it would be legally liable for Amarex's misconduct. I hope Sidley has a viable theory to make NSF vicariously liable here as that would give CYDY considerable added leverage to negotiate a favorable settlement.
My only knowledge regarding the case has come from postings from you, Aaron, Marc, and others who have generously devoted time and effort to access various court filings. Accordingly, knowing that there is considerable info known only to Sidley and Amarex's lawyers, I have been guarded about offering opinions or analysis. But, if you know, is NSF a named defendant (if not, no alleged vicarious liability), and does the complaint seek compensatory damages for breach of contract and some form of tortious misconduct (if only injunctive relief is sought, monetary damages are unlikely, although still possible, to be included in a settlement agreement resolving the lawsuit)? Thanks again for your efforts.
My only knowledge regarding the case has come from postings from you, Aaron, Marc, and others who have generously devoted time and effort to access various court filings. Accordingly, knowing that there is considerable info known only to Sidley and Amarex's lawyers, I have been guarded about offering opinions or analysis. But, if you know, is NSF a named defendant (if not, no alleged vicarious liability), and does the complaint seek compensatory damages for breach of contract and some form of tortious misconduct (if only injunctive relief is sought, monetary damages are unlikely, although still possible, to be included in a settlement agreement resolving the lawsuit)? Thanks again for your efforts.
(4)
(0)