Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 14th Sep 2007 21:36 UTC, submitted by dylansmrjones
SCO, Caldera, Unixware Yahoo reports that SCO has filed [.pdf] for bankruptcy in order to protect assets. "The SCO Group today announced that it filed a voluntary petition for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. SCO's subsidiary, SCO Operations, Inc., has also filed a petition for reorganization. The Board of Directors of The SCO Group have unanimously determined that Chapter 11 reorganization is in the best long-term interest of SCO and its subsidiaries, as well as its customers, shareholders, and employees." Groklaw has a story on it, too.
Thread beginning with comment 271571
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Wrong chapter
by sbergman27 on Sat 15th Sep 2007 19:11 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Wrong chapter"
sbergman27
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. ;-)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Wrong chapter
by Geoff Gigg on Sun 16th Sep 2007 02:06 in reply to "RE[6]: Wrong chapter"
Geoff Gigg Member since:
2006-01-21

Groklaw is more than PJ's opinions. It is also a convenient repository of the legal filings. There you will see SCO's motion in the Novell case in which they quote Chapter 11 law to support their contention that the Novell trial should be postponed until the bankruptcy situation is concluded. I don't know if that's ironclad, but it's definitely their intent.

As stated, Novell is not yet a creditor, and won't be until the trial is concluded because it's in dispute.

I agree with you on the probable merits of SCO's appeal. But that won't stop them trying. It's all they've got!

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: Wrong chapter
by sbergman27 on Sun 16th Sep 2007 03:01 in reply to "RE[7]: Wrong chapter"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

Geoff,

May I suggest lamlaw.com? The nice thing about LamLaw is that Lewis A. Mettler is a real, honest to god, attorney. He's not just a paralegal pretending to be one.*

http://www.lamlaw.com/tiki-read_article.php?articleId=363

The stays on the current court cases are automatic, yes. But the bankruptcy court can lift them. I (as a citizen, not a lawyer!) cannot imagine it *not* ascertaining what is owed to Novell as part of the bankruptcy proceedings.

* Oddly enough, there are no real legal qualifications for a paralegal. There are no educational requirements. Not even a high school diploma, so far as I can tell. No state or federal licensing. Just an optional certification. And no experience requirements. I guess I could call myself a paralegal, buy a domain name, pay my monthly hosting fees, and do my own blog. How about DellaStreet.com? Has a nice ring to it, don't you think? ;-)

Edited 2007-09-16 03:12

Reply Parent Score: 2