Regarding the future of CYDY and LL, I find plenty
Post# of 154003
(Total Views: 710)
Posted On: 02/15/2024 2:18:48 PM
Regarding the future of CYDY and LL, I find plenty of things to obsess about, but the outcome of the arbitration claim is not one of them. My disinterest in opining regarding the arbitration outcome stems, not from its obvious critical importance to CYDY and shareholders, but from my ignorance of so many of the legal issues and evidentiary facts that will be submitted for resolution by the arbitrator. And it's the lay of the land regarding those issues and facts, as intimately known and understood by SA and opposing counsel, that will drive the dollar amount of the likely eventual settlement.
What I can say is that the view from 40,000 feet looks very favorable to CYDY in terms of the behavior (basically misbehavior) of the Amarex employees and the likelihood that such behavior caused CYDY very substantial actual and compensatory damages. But Amarex/NSF will obviously contend that the behavior of CYDY employees contributed to any such damages, and I have no meaningful ability to assess those claims. More importantly, I do not know the policy limits of Amarex's malpractice policy, nor whether it contains an exclusion for intentional acts or gross negligence. (Some posters have indicated their familiarity with policies that cover intentional or gross negligence subject to a clawback provision. Perhaps so, but in my experience, insurance policies usually exclude intentional acts.)
The defendants will also argue the the CYDY Services Contract excludes compensatory and/or consequential damages. I would not be surprised if the arbitrator might favor that construction of the involved contract provision, but SA has an excellent argument under controlling state law that such an exclusion is against public interest, and therefore unenforceable.
Then there's the issue of whether an award can be enforced against NSF through piercing of the corporate veil, an always challenging legal hill to climb.
Need I go on? The above are just some of the unknowns in a jigsaw puzzle where we also have no idea of the extent to which we don't know what we don't know.
In spite of what I have written above, the amount of resources that CYDY and SA have devoted, and continue to devote, to this case leave me with a general sense of optimism that they expect a substantial payout at the end of the day. That amount will be the bottom line here, and if they're feeling good about their chances, then so am I. I don't need to guess about the moving parts that will generate that outcome. But for those posters who feel more insightful about this process than I do, or are just having fun exploring the possibilities, then, go for it. After all, this is a message board.
What I can say is that the view from 40,000 feet looks very favorable to CYDY in terms of the behavior (basically misbehavior) of the Amarex employees and the likelihood that such behavior caused CYDY very substantial actual and compensatory damages. But Amarex/NSF will obviously contend that the behavior of CYDY employees contributed to any such damages, and I have no meaningful ability to assess those claims. More importantly, I do not know the policy limits of Amarex's malpractice policy, nor whether it contains an exclusion for intentional acts or gross negligence. (Some posters have indicated their familiarity with policies that cover intentional or gross negligence subject to a clawback provision. Perhaps so, but in my experience, insurance policies usually exclude intentional acts.)
The defendants will also argue the the CYDY Services Contract excludes compensatory and/or consequential damages. I would not be surprised if the arbitrator might favor that construction of the involved contract provision, but SA has an excellent argument under controlling state law that such an exclusion is against public interest, and therefore unenforceable.
Then there's the issue of whether an award can be enforced against NSF through piercing of the corporate veil, an always challenging legal hill to climb.
Need I go on? The above are just some of the unknowns in a jigsaw puzzle where we also have no idea of the extent to which we don't know what we don't know.
In spite of what I have written above, the amount of resources that CYDY and SA have devoted, and continue to devote, to this case leave me with a general sense of optimism that they expect a substantial payout at the end of the day. That amount will be the bottom line here, and if they're feeling good about their chances, then so am I. I don't need to guess about the moving parts that will generate that outcome. But for those posters who feel more insightful about this process than I do, or are just having fun exploring the possibilities, then, go for it. After all, this is a message board.
(28)
(0)