HC Anderson: "Nice nuanced post. I hope you do not judge based on an agenda to present yourself as a controversial judge"

Okiedo:  Nope, not the purpose of my post.  As I indicated, I said nothing about my own opinion of those 2 controversial opinions given by Judge Du.

My post was only for the purpose of noting that when it comes to decisions rendered in our legal system here in the U.S. there is no such thing as a "sure thing" for either side in a litigation before the Court.

Both sides in the present matter before Judge Du are in a "wishing and hoping" status relative to their own position.  My memory is always suspect, but I believe WB DT may have been the one to point out that the final decision may have separate parts with one or more parts favorable to LAC and possibly one or more parts disadventagious toward the interest of LAC and the stock holders of LAC, but in the final analysis no one really and truly knows for sure what Judge Du will "Do" when push comes to shove.  All we can do is hope for the best and believe that the legal team for LAC and BLM is up to the challenges being presented by the plaintiffs in this matter.  

It is indeed madening to know that so much rides in the balance and that as individual investors in LAC, despite our ardent desires, we can do nothing more to influence the outcome of such an important decision.

"It is what it is", nothing more and nothing less.  And the beat goes on....

Waiting is truly "Hell", ain't that the truth?

Okiedo