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
SCO and Novell Settle Constructive Trust/Payment Matter "In Principal"
Tuesday, November 18 2008 @ 07:31 PM EST

There is a bankruptcy hearing scheduled for November 20th, and there's a Notice of Matters Scheduled for Hearing [PDF] just filed that tells us that the issue of the constructive trust has been resolved "in principal" and there will be a stipulation or consensual order filed. Good Golly, Miss Molly. Is Novell finally going to see some of its money from SCO? Has somebody sprinkled fairy dust in the air or something?

That leaves for the hearing SCO's First Omnibus Objections to Claims:
This matter is going forward solely with respect to those claimants who have not responded to the Claims Objection. The Debtor intends to present a revised form of order at the hearing.
There's a list of those who have responded in this filing. If you don't see your name and you think you did respond, time to dance as fast as you can. As far as Groklaw reporters, I'm thinking this hearing isn't urgent, unless you feel like going just for fun.

Here are the latest docket entries, and I'll get the PDFs in due time, but just so you know what's going on:

604 - Filed & Entered: 11/17/2008
Notice of Service
Docket Text: Notice of Service /Notice of Amendments to Schedules of Liabilities and Time to File Claims in Response to Such Amendments (related document(s)[130], [390], [392]) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Amended Schedule F) (Makowski, Kathleen)

606 - Filed & Entered: 11/18/2008
Certificate of No Objection
Docket Text: Certificate of No Objection Regarding Debtors' Motion for Approval of Stipulation for Relief from Automatic Stay With Respect to IPO Plaintiffs (related document(s)[568]) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service and Service List) (Makowski, Kathleen)

607 - Filed & Entered: 11/18/2008
Certificate of No Objection
Docket Text: Certificate of No Objection Regarding Motion to Approve the Expansion of the Scope of Retention of Tanner LC to Perform Audit of Debtors' Consolidated Financial Statements for Fiscal Year Ending October 31, 2008 and Quarterly Financial Statements in 2009 Nunc Pro Tunc to October 3, 2008 (related document(s)[577]) Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service and Service List) (Makowski, Kathleen)

608 - Filed & Entered: 11/18/2008
Notice of Matters Scheduled for Hearing (B)
Docket Text: Notice of Agenda of Matters Scheduled for Hearing Filed by The SCO Group, Inc.. Hearing scheduled for 11/20/2008 at 09:30 AM at US Bankruptcy Court, 824 Market St., 6th Fl., Courtroom #3, Wilmington, Delaware. (Attachments: # (1) Certificate of Service and Service List) (Makowski, Kathleen)

  


SCO and Novell Settle Constructive Trust/Payment Matter "In Principal" | 212 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Corrections Thread
Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, November 18 2008 @ 07:32 PM EST
Please post corrections to the article below this comment. Thanks.

---
"Then you admit confirming not denying you ever said that?"
"NO! ... I mean Yes! WHAT?"
"I'll put `maybe.'"
--Bloom County

[ Reply to This | # ]

[NP] News Picks Discussion
Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, November 18 2008 @ 07:34 PM EST
Discuss Groklaw News Picks here. Please say which News Pick you are commenting on.

Thanks!

---
"Then you admit confirming not denying you ever said that?"
"NO! ... I mean Yes! WHAT?"
"I'll put `maybe.'"
--Bloom County

[ Reply to This | # ]

[OT] Off Topic Discussion
Authored by: Aladdin Sane on Tuesday, November 18 2008 @ 07:37 PM EST
Post other comments here; those not related to the story. Please do break up long lines such as URL's and other strings not meant to be broken so we don't have to side-scroll.

Thanks.

---
"Then you admit confirming not denying you ever said that?"
"NO! ... I mean Yes! WHAT?"
"I'll put `maybe.'"
--Bloom County

[ Reply to This | # ]

Principle or Principal
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 18 2008 @ 07:54 PM EST
The agenda says Principal. I'm a British English native speaker and to me
Principal here speaks of notions such as sums os money. On the other hand
Principle here speaks of, there remain some points of detail which are not
agreed.

Is this a difference between British English and American English? I'm not just
being a boring pedant - I'd just like to know.

Well anyway, I dont like to count roosters before they're hatched, so can hardly
wait to see the order from SCOG.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Without money...
Authored by: bezz on Tuesday, November 18 2008 @ 08:49 PM EST
The fight is going out of SCO. Why fight this one? The trust was going to set
the money aside, either in Novell's hands or a restricted account. Either way,
SCO wasn't going to get to use it.

There isn't enough money to play games any more. They can't afford the legal
fess. The billings in BK have been low since May, so i suspect at this point it
is all about hanging in there as long as they can without spending anything.

At this point, I would not even be surprised if they fail to file a
reorganization plan. Better to keep the money for paying the remaining staff
than giving it to lawyers for a losing cause.

Hmm, SCO not paying lawyers to pursue nefarious deeds. Smells like the end.

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Without money... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 18 2008 @ 08:56 PM EST
  • Without money... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 18 2008 @ 09:22 PM EST
    • Snakes - Authored by: argee on Tuesday, November 18 2008 @ 10:23 PM EST
      • Snakes - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 12:20 AM EST
        • People - Authored by: attila_the_pun on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 05:20 AM EST
          • People - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 10:28 AM EST
      • Snakes - Authored by: Steve Martin on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 06:15 AM EST
        • Snakes - Authored by: tiger99 on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 07:25 AM EST
          • Snakes - Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 08:59 AM EST
            • Snakes - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 09:03 AM EST
              • Snakes - Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 10:36 AM EST
                • Snakes - Authored by: tiger99 on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 01:27 PM EST
                  • Snakes - Authored by: dcm on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 02:59 PM EST
                    • Snakes - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 05:08 PM EST
                      • Snakes - Authored by: Tufty on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 07:00 PM EST
                        • Snakes - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 08:34 PM EST
                          • Snakes - Authored by: Tufty on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 10:00 PM EST
                            • Snakes - Authored by: tiger99 on Thursday, November 20 2008 @ 10:54 AM EST
                              • Snakes - Authored by: Tufty on Thursday, November 20 2008 @ 11:33 AM EST
                  • Snakes - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 20 2008 @ 07:24 AM EST
                    • Snakes - Authored by: tiger99 on Thursday, November 20 2008 @ 11:06 AM EST
                • Snakes - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 07:10 PM EST
                  • Snakes - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 11:25 PM EST
              • Snakes - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 08:27 PM EST
                • Snakes - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 08:29 PM EST
            • Snakes, cats, and human prejudices. - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 02:21 PM EST
          • Snakes - Authored by: Tufty on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 10:46 AM EST
      • Snakes - Authored by: Tufty on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 10:52 AM EST
      • Snakes - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 02:11 PM EST
    • Without money... - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, November 18 2008 @ 11:31 PM EST
      • Without money... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 18 2008 @ 11:44 PM EST
    • Without money...analogies - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 08:00 AM EST
    • Without money... - Authored by: JamesK on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 05:45 PM EST
    • Without money... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 06:12 PM EST
In Principal...
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 18 2008 @ 09:38 PM EST
Of course, the practice will be somewhat different.

I suspect that SCO thought it would lose out if it didn't agree. An agreement in
principal isn't binding when it comes to practice. All sorts of things can
change depending on the actual conditions at the time it comes to pay up.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Through the Looking Glass
Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 08:21 AM EST
Don't get too excited about the announcement. With SCO words mean exactly what
they want them to mean, and the meaning may change at any time, even other
peoples words.



---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.

"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk

[ Reply to This | # ]

Possible strategy for more delay?
Authored by: rfrazier on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 10:04 AM EST
Let's say that they agree in principle to paying. But it falls through at the
last minute. Could they then say that they need more time to try to resolve the
remaining issues. And, hence, the get through this hearing without a decision.
Then it is Christmas, so they have a decent chance to string things out until
the New year. This would give them a couple of more months.

Best wishes,
Bob

[ Reply to This | # ]

Figure the odds
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 10:30 AM EST
I'd guess a maximum of 20% probability that Novell gets paid without having to
fight off further gamesmanship by SCO.

MSS2

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • Figure the odds - Authored by: mcinsand on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 12:10 PM EST
    • Figure the odds - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 08:48 PM EST
  • You, sir... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 02:00 PM EST
SCO and Novell Settle Constructive Trust/Payment Matter "In Principal"
Authored by: Steve Martin on Wednesday, November 19 2008 @ 08:14 PM EST

So constructive trust issues are settled "in principal", eh? About time. They settled the amount of the constructive trust back in August, and back then they told Judge Kimball that they "anticipate taking this agreement to the Bankruptcy Court and expect resolution of trust-related issues in the near future." I guess two-and-a-half months counts as "near future".

---
"When I say something, I put my name next to it." -- Isaac Jaffe, "Sports Night"

[ Reply to This | # ]

SCO and Novell Settle Constructive Trust/Payment Matter "In Principal"
Authored by: Ian Al on Thursday, November 20 2008 @ 03:37 AM EST
Is Novell finally going to see some of its money from SCO?
No.

What do you mean, I have no idea of the rhetorical?

---
Regards
Ian Al

Linux: Viri can't hear you in free space.

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ -- Delete
Authored by: Steve Martin on Thursday, November 20 2008 @ 05:52 AM EST
Looks like another blogspam.


---
"When I say something, I put my name next to it." -- Isaac Jaffe, "Sports Night"

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • PJ -- Delete - Authored by: PJ on Thursday, November 20 2008 @ 06:17 AM EST
SCO and Novell Settle Constructive Trust/Payment Matter "In Principal"
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 25 2008 @ 06:58 PM EST
Perhaps it is related to the struggles of the stock
market... Since SCO was doing so poorly when the stock
market was great, now that the stock market is struggling
like SCO's stock was, SCO realizes the stock market is a
lost cause for it to magically pull money out of thin
air...

[ 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 ) 		Site layout based on Woodlands theme by Bryan Bell.
Groklaw logo by John Crowley.
News Picks logo by Ted Thompson.
Powered By GeekLog
Created this page in 0.05 seconds