Just to keep the message board alive if for no other reason.
From the point of view of the ultimate outcome of the case, I think it is favorable that it is taking the 7th Circuit so long to reach its decision. As a rule of thumb, the longer it takes a court of appeals to render a written decision, the more likely it is that the court is modifying the trial court's ruling in some fashion. It's easy to write an opinion affirming the trial court -- that doesn't take long.
An extended length of time doesn't guarantee a reversal; there is always the possibility that the court is writing an opinion stating that the trial court got it right, but for the wrong reasons. I don't think that is likely here. It is also possible that the three judges can't agree upon either the result or the language to be used in the opinion.
But, in this case, given the tenor of the oral argument, I think they are writing an opinion reversing the trial court.
Good news for NPK, but I sure wish they would hurry, and I wish that the court of appeals realized the impact the delay has on the company's books -- a reversal should allow NPK to rely upon its spineless accountant's reports without having to have a new accountant redo them.
I find it ironic that Enron, Worldcom, Adelphia etc. occured and the SEC did not act preemptively to prevent investors from those fraudsters. But here the SEC and the courts are out front in investigating and instigating legal action against NPK. Don't you think they ought to reorganize their priorities?
Re your Enron, Adelphia et al. comment: I agree 100%.
I'm kind of surprised that no financial publication has taken an interest in the story: "Company persecuted for having hordes of cash". The contrast with Enron, which didn't even know how much cash it had, is incredible.