% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Yongye International, AŞ Message Board

  • ddbikessamsara ddbikessamsara Mar 23, 2011 6:47 PM Flag

    Lawsuit against libel?

    There simply has to be a way to sue libelous rumors such as those made by the Bezeks of the world. If lawyers can sue companies for real world results that result in share price drops there HAS to be grounds for legal action around rumors that result in equally great share price drops, particularly in light of very favorable audited results posted by the companies involved. It is a crime and should be prosecuted accordingly.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Trolls keep responding to posts with nonsensical titles to discourage intellectual discussions. Tactic is so kindergarden...

    • Correct, just the majority is needed, meaning 7, unless both parties agree to have the case heard before the judge only. But let's say that folks like Ian and paid bashers did get sued, their attorneys will definitely recommend their client(s) to proceed through the arbitration process (which relies outside of the courts system for a judgement). As soon as the money (or non-monetary benefits) is traced back to the accused party, party's over for the accused. I did hear from my legal grapevine that there's been an increased load of summons currently being prepared in relation to these non-factual short attacks. I guess we'll soon find out whether these summons actually get delivered to the defendants...

    • Am I correct that in a civil case you only need a majority of jurors and not all 12?

    • It has nothing to do with lie. If they aren't "FACTS" and IF he received benefits in any form, he's so screwed... One of the damaged firms will slap a civil lawsuit on him. Watch... I wouldn't be surprised if one of the damaged firms is already looking into it.

    • ddbikessams: What rumors, specifically, are you referring to?

      • 1 Reply to
      • EVERYTHING that was posted in the article today was an unsubstantiated opinion of the author. These claims have been clearly refuted by the company once already and have not been made by ANYone except Bezek. The damage to the share price has been immense and there is no proof whatsoever that there is anything truly wrong - only one individual's barely articulate ramblings. That is vastly more criminal and lawsuit-worthy than a company honestly missing quarterly estimates and having the share price slaughtered then being sued by the vampire lawfirms.