I read the stuff Silver posted last night...

RP is right; There is NO CASE for BOW. RP knows it; BOW knows it; and everyone else knows it...

So there is no basis for any "NOT OF CAUTION" as to what the end is going to be in this case...

Law is not a CRAP SHOOT as some would have you believe...

Law is defined as a RULE of reason directed to commonn good. With the sum total of the actions of judges, lawyers and parties involved in its enforcement aimed at peaceful resolution of conflicts bewteen the parties to a dispute...

We don't start shooting up the place when we have disagreements. We take them to Court and get them resolved peacefully...

As it should be , there is always a winning and a loosing side, but the legal system offer us a peaceful an stable social structure that has worked since the Country was formed...

Oh, at times things it get manipulated here and there, (Leopold and Lobe, OJ Simpson cases come to mind), but even that is better than becoming another Bosnia, Sudan, etc. O.J. is in prison now, because he would not accept the peaceful resolutions of his case and went in that hotel room with a gun trying to get his junk back...

Within the legal system, you have to start with your claim, and are permitted to prove it peacefully...But, a VALID CLAIM is essential to success in Court...And it is Balderdash to say that because you have a lot of money you can throw your weight around and succeed in getting what you want...

Our resident "Legal Expert" seems to be using the "Non-Competition", clause 6 of the 4/02/2002 agreement beteewn Boyer and EDIG, as the basis of his casting doubt on what RP told you his EDIG Lawyers have told him... Here is the Clause"

"6. "Non-Competition: RECIPIENT agrees not to compete with APS Inc. directly or indirectly during the term of this agreement and a period of seven (7) years after the termination of this agreement anywhere in the world by years after termination of this agreement by manufacturing and/or selling likeor similar components: ( any and all components that APS Inc. and [ recipient manufactured, designed, etc. RECIPIENT shall be deemed to be competing with APS Inc. if it is a general or limited partner in a partenership that is competing with APS Inc. , or if RECIPIENT diretly or as association is competing with APS Inc."

Simply said: Clause 6 of the agreement of 4/02/2002 is UNENFORECABLE.

FIRST: The time period for "Non-Competition" is the term of the agreement plus 7 years after that term. However, there is no term specified in the agreement?

SECOND: The restriction are too broad, ( "THE WHOLE WORLD", and EDIG is prohibited from manufacturing and/or selling like or similar components".) That means for 7 years + plus the unknown term of the agreement EDIG is supposed to drop out of sight. They could not do anything, like they are doing with MEZZO?

That my friend is absurd and even a lay persons like you knows it intuitively...

Perhaps some good researcher like sman998 will dig out and post here something from let's say CORBIN ON CONTRACTS on the question of Enforcement of Non-Compition Agreements, to point out that Courts will not enforce broad over reaching non competition agreements that essentially stifle Commerce...

Gil...