She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
QUOTE: Originally posted by K. P. Harrier Can anyone provide a link to the actual news story?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.
QUOTE: Originally posted by chad thomas QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan. Trust me; this suit has little, if anything, to do with cash--it is an end run around a proxy battle. Gabe Gabe, Could you please explain this? And remember I don't speak much legaleze.
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan. Trust me; this suit has little, if anything, to do with cash--it is an end run around a proxy battle. Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan.
QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations.
Originally posted by BNSF railfan. Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, April 14, 2005 12:46 PM Gee whiz if he bought at $100.00 PS he would be disgruntled but if he bought 6 months ago @ $50.00 PS he should be smiling all the day to the bank. I guess the suit is togets his dividends faster [:D][:D][:D] Originally posted by BaltACD [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply chad thomas Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Ely, Nv. 6,312 posts Posted by chad thomas on Thursday, April 14, 2005 12:41 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan. Trust me; this suit has little, if anything, to do with cash--it is an end run around a proxy battle. Gabe Gabe, Could you please explain this? And remember I don't speak much legaleze. Reply Mookie Member sinceJune 2001 From: US 13,488 posts Posted by Mookie on Thursday, April 14, 2005 12:13 PM Gabe - I like your style! [:D] She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw Reply gabe Member sinceMarch 2004 From: Indianapolis, Indiana 2,434 posts Posted by gabe on Thursday, April 14, 2005 12:00 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan. Trust me; this suit has little, if anything, to do with cash--it is an end run around a proxy battle. Gabe I saw the article and wondered after Allan posted what your thoughts would be on this. Seems UP settled a 1997 lawsuit in Texas for $34 million in 2000, that looks just like this one. Looks like they will go through it all again? Mook Aside from my conclusion that it is a power thing--as well as a thought similar to yours--my thought is that when my current job reaches its pre-set termination date in August, I need to find a way to get in on this action. If my conclusions about the suit are right, the only winner on this will be the lawyers. Gabe Reply Mookie Member sinceJune 2001 From: US 13,488 posts Posted by Mookie on Thursday, April 14, 2005 11:31 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan. Trust me; this suit has little, if anything, to do with cash--it is an end run around a proxy battle. Gabe I saw the article and wondered after Allan posted what your thoughts would be on this. Seems UP settled a 1997 lawsuit in Texas for $34 million in 2000, that looks just like this one. Looks like they will go through it all again? Mook She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw Reply K. P. Harrier Member sinceOctober 2003 7,968 posts Posted by K. P. Harrier on Thursday, April 14, 2005 11:12 AM After my stumbling across the February TRAINS and reading the UP piece, I wouldn’t be so quick to pass judgment on the subject of this topic. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed. Reply gabe Member sinceMarch 2004 From: Indianapolis, Indiana 2,434 posts Posted by gabe on Thursday, April 14, 2005 10:51 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan. Trust me; this suit has little, if anything, to do with cash--it is an end run around a proxy battle. Gabe Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 14, 2005 9:28 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit BaltACD Member sinceMay 2003 From: US 25,279 posts Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 6:39 PM A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. Never too old to have a happy childhood! Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Suit seeks damages from UP directors. (Omaha-World-Herald) Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 3:17 PM A UP corp. shareholder has sued the company's directors,including chief executive richard davidson,contending that their handling of rail accidents and other incidents cost the company millions of dollars. Investor david jaroslawicz suid 12 directors on behalf of UP,the biggest US Railroad,saying they breached their duty to act in the best interest of the company,according to papers filed in a Utah court last week. Omaha based UPRR would collect any damages in the suit,which cites costs of $103 million from a single derailment in 2000. A series of New York times articles last year said that UPRR and other RR's destroyed or tampered with evidence in crossing accidents and that the US Transportation Department failed to investigate the wrecks. "UPRR has recived the complaint and is reviewing it with council," UPRR spokesman John Bromley said Tuesday. "The company has no further comment at this time." -----Bloomberg News. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
Originally posted by BaltACD [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply chad thomas Member sinceJanuary 2005 From: Ely, Nv. 6,312 posts Posted by chad thomas on Thursday, April 14, 2005 12:41 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan. Trust me; this suit has little, if anything, to do with cash--it is an end run around a proxy battle. Gabe Gabe, Could you please explain this? And remember I don't speak much legaleze. Reply Mookie Member sinceJune 2001 From: US 13,488 posts Posted by Mookie on Thursday, April 14, 2005 12:13 PM Gabe - I like your style! [:D] She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw Reply gabe Member sinceMarch 2004 From: Indianapolis, Indiana 2,434 posts Posted by gabe on Thursday, April 14, 2005 12:00 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan. Trust me; this suit has little, if anything, to do with cash--it is an end run around a proxy battle. Gabe I saw the article and wondered after Allan posted what your thoughts would be on this. Seems UP settled a 1997 lawsuit in Texas for $34 million in 2000, that looks just like this one. Looks like they will go through it all again? Mook Aside from my conclusion that it is a power thing--as well as a thought similar to yours--my thought is that when my current job reaches its pre-set termination date in August, I need to find a way to get in on this action. If my conclusions about the suit are right, the only winner on this will be the lawyers. Gabe Reply Mookie Member sinceJune 2001 From: US 13,488 posts Posted by Mookie on Thursday, April 14, 2005 11:31 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan. Trust me; this suit has little, if anything, to do with cash--it is an end run around a proxy battle. Gabe I saw the article and wondered after Allan posted what your thoughts would be on this. Seems UP settled a 1997 lawsuit in Texas for $34 million in 2000, that looks just like this one. Looks like they will go through it all again? Mook She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw Reply K. P. Harrier Member sinceOctober 2003 7,968 posts Posted by K. P. Harrier on Thursday, April 14, 2005 11:12 AM After my stumbling across the February TRAINS and reading the UP piece, I wouldn’t be so quick to pass judgment on the subject of this topic. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed. Reply gabe Member sinceMarch 2004 From: Indianapolis, Indiana 2,434 posts Posted by gabe on Thursday, April 14, 2005 10:51 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan. Trust me; this suit has little, if anything, to do with cash--it is an end run around a proxy battle. Gabe Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 14, 2005 9:28 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit BaltACD Member sinceMay 2003 From: US 25,279 posts Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 6:39 PM A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. Never too old to have a happy childhood! Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Suit seeks damages from UP directors. (Omaha-World-Herald) Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 3:17 PM A UP corp. shareholder has sued the company's directors,including chief executive richard davidson,contending that their handling of rail accidents and other incidents cost the company millions of dollars. Investor david jaroslawicz suid 12 directors on behalf of UP,the biggest US Railroad,saying they breached their duty to act in the best interest of the company,according to papers filed in a Utah court last week. Omaha based UPRR would collect any damages in the suit,which cites costs of $103 million from a single derailment in 2000. A series of New York times articles last year said that UPRR and other RR's destroyed or tampered with evidence in crossing accidents and that the US Transportation Department failed to investigate the wrecks. "UPRR has recived the complaint and is reviewing it with council," UPRR spokesman John Bromley said Tuesday. "The company has no further comment at this time." -----Bloomberg News. BNSFrailfan. Reply Edit Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
QUOTE: Originally posted by Mookie QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe QUOTE: Originally posted by BNSF railfan. QUOTE: Originally posted by BaltACD A typical rabble rousing disgruntaled stockholder suit. These types of suits are a dime a dozen for large corporations. You know! You have a very good Point there. Someone out wants some Quick CASH! And they know who to go after too. BNSFrailfan. Trust me; this suit has little, if anything, to do with cash--it is an end run around a proxy battle. Gabe I saw the article and wondered after Allan posted what your thoughts would be on this. Seems UP settled a 1997 lawsuit in Texas for $34 million in 2000, that looks just like this one. Looks like they will go through it all again? Mook
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.