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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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


To read comments to this article, go here
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".


  View Printable Version


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 )