decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Hearing Postponed on Gifting York- New Date Sept. 16 [or never?]
Monday, August 11 2008 @ 02:22 PM EDT

It will not surprise you to learn that there has been another postponement of the hearing on SCO's desire to give some unearned money to York Capital Management. If you recall, SCO claimed it felt a moral impulse to pay them even though it doesn't have to. The new date in bankruptcy court for that hearing will be September 16.

Or never.

If I were SCO, I wouldn't want to have to argue that crazy motion either. So, what I'd do is keep postponing until I could file a reorganization plan first, and then after I got out of bankruptcy I could give them whatever I wanted to, without oversight. If I couldn't postpone that long, I'd tell the court I'd dropped the motion. Then I'd pay them later, for whatever the real reason is. Why SCO wants to pay them, and who are they representing anyway, is the real story, I would think. What hold does York, or whoever they are representing, have over SCO? Personally, I discount morals.

Happily, I'm not SCO, so I don't have to think up junk like that or worry my pretty little head over it. Poor SCO. Apparently, they do have to.

Here's the entry on PACER:

08/11/2008 - 524 - HEARING CANCELLED. Notice of Agenda of Matters Scheduled for Hearing. Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. Hearing scheduled for 8/13/2008 at 10:00 AM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824 Market St., 6th Fl., Courtroom #3, Wilmington, Delaware. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service and Service List) (O'Neill, James) (Entered: 08/11/2008)

And here are the objections to this motion:

IBM's
US Trustee
Novell's

These are all referenced in the document filed today, so here they are if you wish to review. Novell was the most blunt, calling SCO's motion a "nothing more than a giveway".


  


Hearing Postponed on Gifting York- New Date Sept. 16 [or never?] | 32 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections Thread
Authored by: tyche on Monday, August 11 2008 @ 02:29 PM EDT
Please summarize the correction in the title. Thanks.

Craig
Tyche

---
"The Truth shall Make Ye Fret"
"TRUTH", Terry Pratchett

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic Here
Authored by: red floyd on Monday, August 11 2008 @ 02:30 PM EDT
Since Tyche beat me by 5 seconds on the corrections thread.

Anyone posting on-topic materials will have to argue SCOXQ.PK's motion in BK
court.

---
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a *CITIZEN* of the United
States of America.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Newspicks Discussion Here
Authored by: red floyd on Monday, August 11 2008 @ 02:32 PM EDT
Please put the title of the newspick (see righthand column) in your title.

---
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a *CITIZEN* of the United
States of America.

[ Reply to This | # ]

The obvious question
Authored by: PolR on Monday, August 11 2008 @ 02:52 PM EDT
Why did they fill a crazy motion if they didn't want to argue it?

Could it be they just wanted to have it on the book and show it to a skeptical
party? Just so they can say "Look here, we did it".

[ Reply to This | # ]

"Personally, I discount morals."
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 11 2008 @ 03:10 PM EDT
You wrote "Personally, I discount morals." -- doesn't that invite
someone quoting you out of context? (It's clear what you have in mind when
reading it all).

[ Reply to This | # ]

So hard to make sense of this mess
Authored by: bezz on Tuesday, August 12 2008 @ 04:39 AM EDT
SCO burned through cash on York and SNCP. Then they filed to pay York more
money because of dome supposed "moral obligation".

Then along came a Novell judgment that was much less than anticipated. The cash
that was wasted on the York and initial SNCP negotiations was wasted. They
could have satisfied the Novell judgment had they not wasted so much of the
cash.

Now they are faced with a situation in which they could have emerged from
Chapter 11 but wasted too much cash. They could have used Chapter 11 protection
to protect the assets, but instead wasted them on York and SNCP. And they are
faced with the dilemma of asking the court to approve York money while in dire
straights to emerge.

I get the sense the PIPE fairies are reluctant to step in. If Tinkerbell was
going to cough up the cash, SCO should have been ready to say something.

Maybe Norris got a whiff of how well a PIPE deal worked out for Baystar.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Hearing Postponed on Gifting York- New Date Sept. 16 [or never?]
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 12 2008 @ 08:34 AM EDT
They are waiting for a date when the Trustee, IBM and Novell can not make it to
court.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )