[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;)
From: |
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra |
Subject: |
Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;) |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Mar 2006 19:23:38 +0000 |
On Tue, 2006-03-21 at 12:54 +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=1600684464&tid=cald&sid=1600684464&mid=355346
> http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=1600684464&tid=cald&sid=1600684464&mid=355344
> http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=1600684464&tid=cald&sid=1600684464&mid=355342
More self quotes. yawn.
You seem to forget the court dismissed the case for futility, so I find
it hard to believe any appeal won't wonder _why_ they considered it
futility...
As many have pointed that out to you in ways that only a fool couldn't
see, futility is the main gist of Wallace's "5 times amended" complaint.
Rui
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), (continued)
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, 2006/03/26
- Message not available
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), David Kastrup, 2006/03/26
- Message not available
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Alexander Terekhov, 2006/03/27
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Alan Mackenzie, 2006/03/27
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Alexander Terekhov, 2006/03/25
Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Alexander Terekhov, 2006/03/21
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;),
Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <=