Replies

"Why would they have the standing to sue Cheney if he wasn't even CEO at the time they purchased stock? This whole thing is very weird."

Now here's a FReeper that can get right to the heart of the facts.

Iwo, any thoughts?

That's MY question. How can they sue Cheney personally if he had been gone from the company for almost a year and a half when they bought their stock????

Last night, FIJC said, "If the judge doesn't throw it out, I believe Larry has a good case," or something close to that.

I was really confused by that remark, like, why would you file a case if you thought it would get thrown out....but now I get it!

"Why would they have the standing to sue Cheney if he wasn't even CEO at the time they purchased stock? "

It's not a matter of standing (that's an entirely different concept). But it's going to be a challenge for the Plaintiffs to explain how things which happened in 1998, 1999 when Cheney was there caused them to buy stock in 2001, 2002. It's a matter of causation.

There are a lot of causation problems with a suit like this. You can say "O.K., assuming that what you say about what happened is true, just how did that harm YOU?" Many times, plaintiffs are just unable to make a realistic showing of causation of damages.

Lawsuits and discovery can be a b-i-itch. I wonder if these plaintiffs are ready for that?