Report Abuse

craig, i agree with much of what you wrote and the process you described: i don't know how old you are, and i'd prefer not divulging my age (which will be 79...this july! OOPS) in this forum, but..........here goes..................how long do you think it would it take us, after the ag's assumptive "win", to settle the remains and spoils with eichner and his fraudulent (and schemingly brilliant) team/cohorts? i'll take a guess: i think i'll be in the NIRVANA SUITE OF THE MANHATTAN CLUB by the time any equitable settlement between us owners and eichner comes to fruition. ha, at that point, the statute of limitations would become a contradiction of terms. be happy and stay well. chris [Q=craigr32] It is a little confusing, but I thought that the NYAG took the criminal charges off the table in order to compel the defendants to be deposed (they were using the threat of criminal charges as a reason they could not). Moreover, I never expected that the NYAG would necessarily pursue a remedy on the owner's behalf unless there was a settlement where the defendants agreed to provide relief in lieu of risking a judgement against them in the NYAG case. If there is a trial, I expect the NYAG will prosecute a case of fraud, and if the defendants lose, they will then face the prospect of lawsuits from the owners, either singly or collectively, where the owners start with the finding that they have a judgement of fraud from the NYAG case against the defendants. (This usually provides a lot of motivation for the defendants to settle the NYAG suit with an agreement that would give the owners substantial relief if they think there is any chance the NYAG would prevail) I am not aware of a statute of limitations in a fraud case like this, but I admit I don't have a clue about how New York rules work.[/Q]