and we know not you personally, concludes that this is what occured, but I suspect that Brown's attorney will want to explore and consider the strategies, motivations, encouragements, incentives or events which played a role or lead up to the making of any subsequent agreements or arrangements which effectively limit his client's expected recovery from his MMP investment.
Leckrone's failure to pay Brown (contract breach) was already the basis of a lawsuit, so it's common sense that Brown's lawyer will likely be suspicious of any contractual events which negatively influence or reduce his client's continued expected recovery.
As I recall, there is quite a body of law on such matters.
I STILL WANT TO KNOW IF TPL DISCLOSED TO PTSC THAT HE HAD COMMITTED THE MMP TO A SUPERCEEDING PAYMENT OBLIGATION TO BROWN FROM THE LICENSING REVENUES.
Did PTSC know, and if so, why did it never appear in any of PTSC's communications to Shareolders ? If PTSC did not know, what legal action or repayment offset are we going to take against TPL ?
