Friday, December 2, 2011

Max

As you can see Max vs GS Agrifuels has been covered in a recent blog HERE.    The background here is important:  Here from the 2009 Annual report p. 19:

First GS Agrifuels files this:

The Company’s GS AgriFuels subsidiary is party to the matter entitled GS AgriFuels Corporation v. Chaykin, et al. The action was filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, on February 2, 2009. The Complaint seeks damages for defendants' fraudulent misrepresentations, tortious interference, breach of acquisition agreements and related claims relating to the sale by the defendants of the stock of Sustainable Systems, Inc. (“Culbertson”) to GS AgriFuels, and arising from the disclosure by the defendants that Culbertson owned its Culbertson, Montana oilseed crushing facility when in fact Culbertson merely held the right to purchase the Montana facility at the time of the acquisition by GS AgriFuels; the failure to disclose by the defendants that Culbertson’s right to purchase the Montana facility, as well as any investment made in the Montana facility, was subject to forfeiture within months of entering into the acquisition agreements with GS AgriFuels; and, the provision by the defendants of materially false financial statements.

Next Max, et al files this and it gets dismissed:

The defendants served a separate action entitled Max, et al. v. GS AgriFuels Corporation, et al. in the Montana Fourth Judicial District Court in response to GS AgriFuels’ New York complaint; this Montana complaint was dismissed in January 2010.

Next GS AgriFuel's motion for Summary judgement is granted:

The New York court granted GS AgriFuels’ March 2010 motion for summary judgment as to liability on GS AgriFuels’ fraud and breach of contract claims on April 8, 2010. During 2008 and 2009, three of the former shareholders of Culbertson, corresponding to about 60% of the former shareholders’ prior ownership interest in Culbertson, entered into settlement agreements pursuant to which has all parties have been released from all obligations under the relevant acquisition agreements and otherwise.


********************
May of this year Max and company filed again here:
Court Docket 
Here list of documents
HERE is where they voluntarily withdraw their own complaint in July.
 
********************
Now in November Max and company filed again - seems same as previous filing that was withdrawn Court Docket
Court Conference scheduled HERE
Case put in a Pilot Project HERE
********************
My opinion of this business?  I see no filing of a complaint.  Why is that?  Why would someone sue another party but fail to file a complaint?  Why would they then withdraw the case and then wait a couple months and again file the same thing without a complaint?  The litigation filed in May goes two months and then is withdrawn - no complaint is filed.  The litigation in November is filed the same way and the first judge just declined the case because the case is similar to the one voluntarily dismissed.    Until I see a complaint filed, my opinion borders on this being a harassment filing by a party that has lost previous litigation. 

Although I might be accused of getting out my tin foil hat, I cannot help but comment on the fact that this Agri-Fuels issue has been a recurring theme of (what I believe to be) a single poster on Yahoo over the years (Please . .  read carefully.  No, I did not just say all Yahoos posting as self-described victims were the same person  :~)).  In any case, the victim-hood mentality developed from expecting a big payoff from selling the Seed Crushing Plant to Agri-Fuels, (even though they appeared to have sold it to Agri-Fuels without owning a clear title) explains to me both the tone and the tenacity of the negative Yahoo posts - from that poster - over the years.  To put it very simply, my gut feeling - for some time - is that one of those with a direct or family interest in these Seed Crushing related legal suits is a negative poster on Yahoo.
 
SkunK

Fagen Litigation - nothing new as of 8:15am cst
Patent Litigation - nothing new as of 8:15am cst

4 comments:

nobody123789 said...

Well researched and written, thank you for your diligence.

Anonymous said...

Great Blog-as usual Skunk. Thanks, Ollie.

Anonymous said...

I agree, the yahoo poster lurking in the shadows here is somehow tied to some form of litigation.

Anonymous said...

nice hat skunk, its just like mine. Where did you get the cool glasses?

 
Free Blog CounterTamron