I agree with everyone RE the lack on info related to any MDMN litigation, whether Okandian, GKX, Les, or otherwise. This lack of guidance leads directly to my frustration.
I take pride in my openness with my clients and my willingness to involve my clients fully in their own litigation. I find a client who fully understands both the positives and negatives of their case, plus how the legal process affects those positives and negatives appreciates my help more and understands the outcome of litigation, without drama. Every attorney has different ways to handle litigation. I am not saying our current counsel is incompetent, just I cannot see the benefit of their actions to MDMN based upon my experience as a litigator. As a client, and I am a client because I own way too much stock in MDMN, I feel we should have a better idea of the scope and direction of all of MDMN’s litigation. If I was better informed, I know I would understand better the approach to the litigation and its benefits to MDMN.
I approach representation through zealous representation of my client. I always treat the opposing side with respect (you get more flies with honey than vinegar), but I utilize every advantage for my client to get them in the best situation in the litigation. Sometimes gaining the advantage means trying to settle without trial and further expense to the client. Other times it means refusing all offers of settlement and going to trial. Each case is unique. Especially when dealing with a crazy plaintiff or as Mike has said a nuisance lawsuit. When your client is at an obvious disadvantage RE the law or resources to fight a case, IMO then you need to mitigate the cost and expense of litigation and reach out to the other side to try resolve it and use litigation as a last resort. However, when your client is in the driver’s seat RE the law and resources to fight a case, IMO you hammer the other side with your strength and force them to come to you to try to resolve.
Just calling something a nuisance and minimizing its affect upon your client will lead to nothing but harm for that client. My frustration with the MDMN filing comes from review of the complaint and the relevant law and basic legal principles. IMO, MDMN had Les by the shorts hairs both legally and factually. MDMN could have presented these legal and factual arguments in support of itself and used it both in the media and legal forum to improve MDMN’s image before both the court and the public. MDMN could have forced Les to expend tons of money and time pushing his nuisance lawsuits forward at the same time he had to defend against MDMN claims or fraud, forgery, etc. against him. But as of now, MDMN has not done these things. MDMN has not utilized its statutory right to file affirmative defenses or counter-claims and now much seek court permission to do so. Hopefully, the response is just the first step and they will request leave to amend the response to add affirmative defenses and leave of court to file a counter-claim. If this action occurs relatively soon (before in depth discovery begins), then I would have a better information as to MDMN’s direction from the affirmative defense and counter-complaint; and I would not feel frustrated. If MDMN does nothing more than they already have done and this case goes longer into the discovery process, IMO I do not see a positive resolution for MDMN.
My current opinion leads me to my request for better information on the scope and direction of all litigation by MDMN. As the client (ie: shareholder), I feel MDMN needs to provide all of us better guidance. It doesn’t have to be hugely in-depth, just something simple. For example,
“MDMN has filed a response to the GKX litigation and will soon file a response to the Les litigation. MDMN and its attorneys have reviewed over 10,000 pages of documents and emails relating to these two lawsuits. MDMN’s attorney will shortly request from the court leave to file its affirmative defenses and counter-claims to both lawsuits. MDMN’s affirmative defenses and counter-claims will outline in detail MDMN’s believed fraudulent, unethical, and illegal conduct of Les and his associates. MDMN believes these affirmative defenses and counter-claims will absolve MDMN of any liability in the GKX and Les litigation and allow MDMN to hold Les liable to MDMN for his conduct. Upon completion of this document review and legal filings, MDMN will also forward all information obtained to the appropriate US State, US Federal, and Canadian authorities to allow them to conduct an investigation of GKX, Les, and his associates to determine if they broke any criminal laws or regulations.”
OR
“MDMN has filed a general denial of GKX and Les’s complaint and has determined they have enough information to prevail at trial. MDMN’s attorneys have decided to expedite this litigation to a trial as soon as possible to minimize the costs of litigation to MDMN and remove what MDMN believes is a frivolous lawsuit. MDMN will be tendering to the plaintiff voluminous documentation to support its defense, taking the deposition of the key person relating to the defense, and requesting a trial from the court as soon as practically possible. Regarding any claim MDMN may have against GKX, Les, or other parties, MDMN’s attorneys must continue to finalize and strengthen the claims which MDMN believes they have and are well within any statute of limitations to file these claims. MDMN will resolve the current litigation with GKX and Les so it will not act as a distraction when MDMN brings its claims. Upon completion of this document review and legal filings, MDMN will also forward all information obtained to the appropriate US State, US Federal, and Canadian authorities to allow them to conduct an investigation of GKX, Les, and his associates to determine if they broke any criminal laws or regulations.”
Either way, or even something different, but an update which provides concrete guidance to MDMN shareholders without delving into the particulars of the cases or disclosing evidence to be used in the cases. I am not asking to sit in on MDMN’s meetings to discuss the merits of the case. Just give us guidance. I feel we deserve no less.
