Geo did tie up financials for 2 years but should n

Geo did tie up financials for 2 years but should not be able to now because there have been no further financial dealings w Geo since Aug 2011

now I think auditors merely need to have notes in the financials re the legal and mention what CWRN etc are asking for - which will give the reader an idea of the possible financial impact of legal and perhaps give  a range of values for receivables etc
this is because financial statements primarily reflect past performance-and what CWRN is asking for is part of that past performance as a receivable and what Geo is asking for is a possible liability-but the possible receivables far exceed the possible liability from my reading of the respective complaints-which have been posted before

Remember CWRN's case against Geo is much larger and CWRN is asking for as much as perhaps 7.5 million in actual damages plus scores of millions in punitive damages as part of ca 13 counts-Geo is asking for ca 1million cash plus some for equipment

CWRN was able to appeal the venue issue because that is a basic prime jurisdictional issue-but appealing other issues is not so easy and only ca 5% or less of appeals are successful

If  the court awards CWRN a money amount and Geo appeals, accountants would either note it as a receivable-and then further explain in the notes-or just note as a receivable in the notes but not part of statements until the appellate court ruled-and auditors are especially conservative so they might employ the latter

if Geo never paid a judgment, at some point accountants/legal would make a judgment call and write off as a bad debt-which would assume Geo had no assets beyond the minimum protected by law (homestead acts etc)-which would mean Geo and Jimmy etc were bankrupt