Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 14th Sep 2007 21:36 UTC, submitted by dylansmrjones
Permalink for comment 271571
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/15/13 23:03 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-24
"""
Check Groklaw.
"""
Could you cite a reliable legal source? I'm not certain how a bitter and grudge-holding paralegal on a vendetta ever achieved the status of the community's Oracle of Delphi. A paralegal, and in particular, an openly hostile and biased one, is just as much "not a lawyer" as the rest of us. Let me know if and when she ever passes the Bar.
That SCO owes Novell money has already been decided. The actual amount owed was never within the scope of these proceedings. The fact that SCO fails to mention it in their filing does not make it go away. The bankruptcy court will not turn a blind eye to it. That court has a solemn responsibility to *all* of SCO's creditors over the course of their bankruptcy.
As to a SCO appeal to a more favorable court... it's hard to imagine a more favorable court than was Judge Kimball's. Kimball and Wells went to great lengths to give SCO every opportunity to make some sort of case. They showed a patience with SCO which went far beyond what SCO might have expected from some other judges.
It would be astounding if that was *not* the first thing that any judge reviewing the case, on appeal, would notice.
IANAL, of course. ;-)