@fairlanefastback

Quote:

fairlanefastback wrote: @Tigger The original letter from Amiga Delaware's lawyers somewhat implies that Hyperion was asking for money for 3.01 but does not explicitly say that the $8,850 balance was a balance for 3.01. The responses later by Hyperion seem to refute the notion that it had anything to do with Section 3.01. If the October 10th (2006) letter from Hyperion to Amiga Delaware states otherwise it would greatly impact the judge I would suspect as it would throw Hyperion's case on its ear. I suspect then that the letter does not demand $8,850 for 3.01, at least not specifically IMHO. If it did it would have good slam dunk potential to blow away a major Hyperion legal arguement in this case.

The problem with that theory is that if its not the 3.01 and 3.01 cannot be complied with (ie Hyperion theory #7), then Hyperion owes 22,250, they wrote a receipt for $22,500 but at very least they owe $22,250 back. Why are they asking for more money $8,850 when they already have collected $22,250 in a late payment as they are claiming? They havent claimed that it was moved to other debts, they wrote a receipt that it was for the 3.01 clause. So why hasnt that money been returned?

Quote:

Page 11 of which document are you refering to BTW?

The document of the hearing for the injunction.
-Tig

_________________
We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world.