The firm Rossi selected typically does work on a contingent basis.  So they 
don’t collect fees unless they win.  Typically the contract calls for the 
payment of expenses.


That wouldn’t prevent them from seeking fees from the other side but if there 
was no recovery, Rossi may not have paid any fees just costs.


Just an FYI.




From: Lennart Thornros [] 
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 4:34 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won'


Jones, yes lawyers are big winners as in all lawsuits. 

Agree that Rossi got what he wanted and paid for it. If it is junk it remins to 
be seen. IMHO he could retire on 4 mil also.

Dumb Swedes, maybe future will tell. How you KNOW is mindboggling to me. He is 
an entrpreneur, a risktaker and he does search for an answer. not manyof us can 
live up  to that or you show me your contribution in those regards.

i admire your theoretical knowledge *cannot judge the quality. That is good for 
the discussion. your simple negative opinion about the person  is misplaced, to 
not use stronger djective.



On Jul 27, 2017 15:18, "" <> 

Living in fantasy land is like living in the desert with head in the sand 
IMHO---not unlike the land where religious dogma is prevails. 


My wondering did not take long to be resolved.


Bob Cook



From: Jones Beene <> 
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 5:38 AM

Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won'


Anyone who thinks Rossi "won" is living in fantasy land.

The only big winners were the attorneys for both sides.

Both sides submitted bills to the Court of about $7.5 million each, 
hoping the judge would assess those costs to the other side. This 
similarity of bills looks like collusion on their part - but there is no 
reason to believe that they were paid substantially less by their clients.

That means most of the initial $11 million which Rossi got from IH was 
lost to him in the filing of the lawsuit. But he is not home-free. Rossi 
gets to keep his junk IP and apparently the Swedes love him, so he may 
resurface over there if he can stand the winters.

Rossi was not charged with perjury for his deposition - at least not 
yet. IH believes he should have been charged - and that could still 
happen. No agreement with IH will protect him from perjury.

As for the legal fees of IH plus the other money they paid to Rossi up 
front - that is probably over $20 million, BUT they offloaded all of 
that expense and more to a British Investment firm - which has actually 
gone up in value since they made the $50 million investment in IH/Cherokee.

If you are "following the buck" in all of this, here is how it stands:

1) Rossi has a net of about $4 million ($11 million minus attorneys fees)
2) Darden has a net of about $30 million ($50 million from Woodford 
minus $20 million)
3) The attorneys have a net of about $15 million
4) Woodford Patient Capital Trust is up about 14% from when they 
invested in IH

In a way, it looks like Darden is in fact the biggest winner here ... 
but in one of the never-ending mysteries of capitalism - the big loser 
is not apparent... other than the vorticians who wasted hundreds of 
hours posting and reading a "show about nothing"

... with apologies to Jerry, his nothing was at least funny...



Reply via email to