Mac, his wife and daughter and mother and father in-law and about 35 lenders spent about an hour and half in court today to hear the judge request of Mac more clarity in information to be handed over to BISCHA within 7 days and a stating that a hearing is aimed for November. I am not going to go into any more details and let others - even Mac possibly - add the details of what happened today and what to expect. I just know that we all continue to be held in a state of "limbo" for at least the rest of this year, if a settlement is not reached first. I spent much time after today's hearing speaking with lawyers from BISCHA and have offered them full access to my computer with all emails between myself and Mac (and btw me and Julianna) to show them what I know. They jumped on this opportunity as well as the chance of talking to me about Lou, who I met. There is absolutely nothing to hide and if it will help them gain a better understanding, so be it. BISCHA is hoping that people will continue to come forward and sign affidavits that resemble what is said on the petition that was created by the AC group. They cannot submit the petition for the group, nor can they do anything in support of the main parts of the petition that would transfer ownership of the film to any other entity. When I asked how their efforts would help any better in the repayment of debt, they couldn't come up with anything more than "trust us - we have been spot on so far". I personally trust them as far as getting Mac ordered to pay back all the money, but that is nothing more that what Mac has stated all along. They don't think that a legal order signed by the court stating the same is as good as putting Mac through trial and hearing the judge say it. I don't see any gain from a judge saying it in court over signing off on a settlement that says the same thing. My intuition reads "ego" is behind this, not concern for us as lenders. I know there are those who disagree and I hope they make comment to my thoughts so that all can decide for themselves. What I will focus on is doing all I can to provide the prosecution with facts in hopes that they be receptive to hearing the whole truth and cut the time short with accepting a settlement.
This said...there are still questions I would like Mac to answer...I hope he can answer some through this Blog or a mtg.
I tend to agree that a trial isn't going to be that much better than a settlement, but maybe BSHCA knows this from experience. However, a trial is going to take a too long. BTW, my name on the Google account is Lunita, but this is Sue Landry.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone else have a perspective to share about the hearing? I was unable to attend. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteTo elaborate somewhat on Sharon’s report:
ReplyDeleteThe open court session began at 2:13 pm, following an extended conference with Judge Crawford and counsel in chambers. BISHCA was represented by Philip Cykon and Peter Young. The judge noted that he would have invited everyone to the conference, but there wouldn’t have been enough room. He didn’t explain why he didn’t just hold the conference in the courtroom. (Perhaps court procedures don’t permit such informalities.) He then stated that he wanted to resolve the outstanding issues "...as quickly and fairly as we can."
The lawyers orally summarized their cases at some length. Mac’s counsel noted that BISHCA hasn’t submitted anything to counter or refute lenders’ affidavits regarding their motivations. Atty. Cykon noted aspects of the situation supporting BISHCA’s position that the notes qualified as securities. If I understood him correctly, their legal perspective is that it doesn’t matter whether the lenders considered the funds they provided to be loans.
The judge indicated that he will issue a written decision on the defense’s motion for summary judgment soon.
There was further discussion and negotiation regarding defense counsel’s concern about potential privileged material in written communications contained in a data disc in BISHCA’s possession.
The judge said he will do his best to get something out "today or tomorrow" regarding areas of agreement on the accounting ordered by the court.
The hearing adjourned at approximately 2:43 pm.
Our sense was that both sides made at least some valid points in their arguments, so it seems less than likely that the judge’s decision will tilt in Mac’s favor, unless he chooses to rule on narrow legal grounds. We concur with Sharon’s observation regarding BISHCA’s "self-assurance."
Roger and Linda Fox