ABA Journal



Judge Fights to Uphold Delaware’s Reputation of Being Fair to Corporations

Nov 1, 2012, 10:00 am CDT


DE, the State that I love (and may never be able to return to - so that I don’t wind up in the dump too) - has gotten WAY out of control.

This past week, a filing in Delaware Federal BK Court that named Mitt Romney & Bain Capital was (illegally) withheld from the court docket record.

Our eToys case (DE Bankr 01-706) is the very reason Mitt needs to be “retroactively” resigned from August 2001. The EVENT of August 2, 2001 (nomination of Bain Capital’s attorney Colm Connolly to become US Attorney) - is a piece of federal corruption that may permanently succeed; once he fleeces the White House chair!

By Laser Haas on 2012 10 30, 10:39 pm CDT

I’ll believe the US courts are “fair to corporations” when I see a court give the death penalty to a corporation whose purposeful behavior has killed innocent people, by dissolving the corporation and selling off it’s assets, and giving the proceeds as compensation to the families of those killed.

By TMJ on 2012 11 18, 11:38 pm CST

Correct TMJ

Our litigation issues versus Mitt Romney/ Bain Capital were, illicitly, withheld from the public docket record for 2 weeks (from Oct 24) and placed in on November 6, 2012 (the Clerk said our Motion was “politically” motivated and therefore forbidden by law (man - did the whole world of lawsuits go out the door with that jurisprudent premise - or what)?

Then, when Romney lost (as he should have not even been allowed to run) - the court put it into the docket record on November 7, 2012 and set a hearing date for December 4, 2012.

Because we found an additional 101 crimes and acts of Perjury the court has not previous addressed - we put them into the docket record and requested a response from the parties.

They “responded” with a Motion to shorten notice (they emailed it to me Friday afternoon at 4 p.m. and wanted the court to grant the “short notice” (for them to take my hearing and turn it into their hearing) - and also requested the court grant them permission that they do NOT have to respond to the allegations.

On Tuesday afternoon (November 20, 2012) - the court Granted their Motion and stipulated that I must respond by November 20, 2012.

I did respond - but the court ignored it anyway.

That is how it “really” works in “DEALaware”

By Laser Haas on 2012 11 21, 3:59 am CST

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.