sci.astro.amateur
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Rules of Evidence (S&T January Editorial)

Subject: Re: Rules of Evidence S&T January Editorial
From: gobbletwo
Date: Sun, 03 Dec 2006 22:44:46 GMT
Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
George Normandin wrote:
"William Hamblen" <> wrote

I just don't understand how they intend to benefit from suing dealers.
Bad karma there, man!

The dealers also are alleged to be committing the civil wrong.  The
lawyers will go after as many as they can with as many legal theories
they can muster.   They'll just have to fight it out in court.  I
think RCOS is wasting its money on legal fees myself.



If they're suing all Meade dealers they may have some real resistance. According to the "Company 7" website over 80% of Meade sales are to Wal-Mart. Picking a fight with Meade is one thing, picking a fight with the "Wal-Martians" is quite another.

Perhaps the idea is that a lawsuit against Meade, along with all of Meade's other problems (multi-million $$ loss, back-dated stock options fraud investigation) will be enough to scare off schools, and other big institutional buyers. With the drop in Meade stock and their other legal problems this suit could give the impression that Meade might not survive.

George N

Walmart is not a Respondent in the action, afaik. It has been noted,though, that Microsoft was in line to become dealer in bogus RC telescopes. Deep pockets:ask Ballmer... ;-)

jon

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>