Well, Mark, good points but in this discussion you need to be specific as to which/who's allegation of Fraud you are talking about, PTSC's or Moore's.
If Moore's allegations, IMO you are probably correct. The main reason being that Moore admits/complains about how no financial visibility was provided him by Lecky - even that visibility required per their agreements. Then, out of the other side of his mouth, he alleges financial/accounting wrongdoing. Based on what, word of mouth? And then the focus may turn to the "books" (if the allegation is entertained by the court), and the twisting could begin. This ignores Moore's other allegations.
If PTSC's allegations, it's IMO a completely different animal. PTSC has not alleged accounting fraud beyond top-level revenue allocation/% when multiple patent portfolios are involved. What I believe is being claimed by PTSC is that two resolutions were properly voted on and approved by a majority of the PDS Management Committee; one of those resolutions prevented Lecky from unilaterally executing licensing agreements - he no longer had corporate commitment authority for such actions. Then he went ahead and did it. No 'twisting" available, other than to try and convince the court that those resolutions were not valid. But he cannot claim an "Ooops". He knew of the resolutions, he knew they were passed, he knew he was acting in defiance of at least one resolution (I don't even need to address the other, but it's virtually the same scenario). When he signed that April licensing agreement, ASSUMING this was after the resolutions were passed, it was IMO a clear cut act of fraud. Like signing a check from someone else's checking account. There is the one assumption, but IMO I have it right or there would not be plausible grounds for PTSC's suit in this regard.
Perhaps one of our resident attorneys will chime in. I'm always open to correction when the correction is true and proper.
SGE
