CGL Speculation #7 Options

[Kid Chameleon]

You seem to forget that my argument was that "the members" either meant "all the members" or was a mistake in the given context. You stated that in this conetxt it could mean "some members", which I disputed.

I went in a hypothetical example since the Swiss law was used as an example. So I answered that line of argument.

As far as the significance of the "the" goes - I claim, and stand by that, that it means "all the members" in the context, or was a mistake by the lawyer (or his help). And I also think such mistakes should not be made. Of course people, even here, might have lower standards.

If someone files to force IMR into bankruptcy in Switzerland and issues the same response, maybe your point will be valid.

[Fuchs]

After seeing three people who are apparently knowledgeable about legal procedure say "don't read too much into it", I think the repeated attempts by non-lawyers to read to much into it can be safely ignored.

What I read into it is that "the members" in the context given could only mean "all the members", or have been a mistake. And if we believe KC's posts, then officially registrated are just two members of IRM LLC, the Colemans.

So the use of "the members" would have been correct in that case.

We went off on a tangent because we disagree on what kind of leeway legal statements are allowed before they can be called sloppy, or shitty, where a number of US-lawyers or people with knowledge of the law stated that inaccuracies in motions are normal.

[Fuchs]

I'm saying that most people generally ignorant of the business ownership and tax laws, and are not in a habit of going through and re-doing everything hired professionals do. Do you understand, re-check, and re-tally every single item in every line of every document you look over before signing?

When it comes to taxes, of course. Who would not?

[Kid Chameleon]

And if we believe KC's posts, then officially registrated are just two members of IRM LLC, the Colemans.

I never stated that. I don't know that to be true or false.

[Fuchs]

If someone files to force IMR into bankruptcy in Switzerland and issues the same response, maybe your point will be valid.

Does IRM have officially registrated members other than the two Colemans?

[Kid Chameleon]

Does IRM have officially registrated members other than the two Colemans?

See above.

[Fuchs]

I never stated that. I don't know that to be true or false.

Wait a minute... didn't you claim to be an owner once?

[Kid Chameleon]

Wait a minute... didn't you claim to be an owner once?

Actually Stephen McQuillan stated that first. I am. I haven't seen the registration paperwork, so I can't know what's on it.

[Demonseed Elite]

Welcome to IMR: Where no one knows what the hell is going on.

[Fuchs]

Actually Stephen McQuillan stated that first. I am. I haven't seen the registration paperwork, so I can't know what's on it.

But, you'd know if you are a member or not, right?

[Kid Chameleon]

But, you'd know if you are a member or not, right?

Reread the thread, then get back to me.

I don't have a Members Only jacket though...
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[DireRadiant]

Someone wanna take his shovel away before he hits bedrock?

This kind of contribution is unnecessary.

[Fuchs]

Reread the thread, then get back to me.

But... you never checked the paperwork of the LLC you're a member of?

[DireRadiant]

Spamming and needlessly bumping threads are against the ToS. Repeatedly questioning and posting in a thread could also be considered a form of harrassment, trolling or baiting. While there may not be a single specific post that violates the ToS it's certainly possible for a repeated pattern of behavior to do so.

Discussion on this topic is welcomed and encouraged, but please be civil about it.

[Lithium]

Well given that it is the 27th of May, surely the REAL news about CGL and Shadowrun and Topps should be announced in the next couple of days?

[Accel]

I went in a hypothetical example since the Swiss law was used as an example. So I answered that line of argument.

I'm sorry, but whatever line of argument you answered, it certainly wasn't mine.

You have your right to interpret the words of Mr. Santucci (or his subordinates) as you wish. Whether or not a certain word is a mistake depends on the context, however. LLC statutory law of one state or another may or may not have a provision stating who has the legal authority to act (solely or jointly) on behalf of an LLC, so that in some cases there might be the need to clarify a person's standing first. But obviously not in this case, since there is absolutely no indication that first, the status of Loren L. Coleman and wife as the governing members, and second that this status suffices to counter this particular legal action against IMR on its behalf is in any way contested. So why elaborate on it, especially under the given time constraints? Or would you rather have Mr. Santucci missed his deadline for a triviality?

[Fuchs]

I'm sorry, but whatever line of argument you answered, it certainly wasn't mine.

You have your right to interpret the words of Mr. Santucci (or his subordinates) as you wish. Whether or not a certain word is a mistake depends on the context, however. LLC statutory law of one state or another may or may not have a provision stating who has the legal authority to act (solely or jointly) on behalf of an LLC, so that in some cases there might be the need to clarify a person's standing first. But obviously not in this case, since there is absolutely no indication that first, the status of Loren L. Coleman and wife as the governing members, and second that this status suffices to counter this particular legal action against IMR on its behalf is in any way contested. So why elaborate on it, especially under the given time constraints? Or would you rather have Mr. Santucci missed his deadline for a triviality?

You mentioned swiss law, I said that in swiss law, naming all members might be needed under certain circumstances since you alleged that such details were not needed. Since I have personally seen a case in swiss bankruptcy law dismissed for having a signature at the wrong place on a document, I'd not dismiss the need for precision in legal statements as easily as others.

In the case here, after reading the latest posts, I think the lawyer was entirely correct in his wording in that sentence, and that the Colemans are all the official members - at least all the registered members.

[Kid Chameleon]

But... you never checked the paperwork of the LLC you're a member of?

I don't get out to Washington State much. Once when I was two and once last year on a working vacation. I had bigger fish to fry then checking on that.

[MindandPen]

That assumes some is paying attention and knows enough on both ends to realize something is wrong.

Like the Government?

From the point of view of the accountant, nothing is wrong.
From the point of view of the lawyer, either he doesn't realize his mistake, or he does and he's not saying anything. He probably isn't involved in the tax filing.
From the point of view of the owners, the lawyer says his side is right, and the accountant says according to what's on file his side is right.

Okay, I have to dance delicately here.

The IRS has a very large computer system that tracks all of these discrete elements. They do not necessarily all get put together, but if they do, then someone, with a big hammer, will notice, if there is a problem - and I am not commenting on if I think there is a problem is this post.

-M&P

[otakusensei]

Well given that it is the 27th of May, surely the REAL news about CGL and Shadowrun and Topps should be announced in the next couple of days?

Don't expect anything right away unless IMR gets the license, and only then once everything is signed, sealed and delivered. The final details can take some serious lawyer time and that's assuming everything goes smoothly. We may get some rumors or hints, but I doubt we'll get any substance. Of course I could be wrong. In this case I'd love to be wrong.

[tweak]

Well given that it is the 27th of May, surely the REAL news about CGL and Shadowrun and Topps should be announced in the next couple of days?

Yeah. I want to know about the license status. There are still some books that I need to buy, so I want to plan out my purchases accordingly.

[Grinder]

Well given that it is the 27th of May, surely the REAL news about CGL and Shadowrun and Topps should be announced in the next couple of days?

Feel free to open a new thread once that happened - this one is closed, since it has been derailed into a couple of pissing matches with no real information.