X****i
发帖数: 1877 | 2
scheme/
Even if the banks' allegations were true,
which Newegg no doubt will deny,
the banks cannot possibly be without blame,
since they could not be so inexperienced or
incompetent as to be merrily unaware of the
optimistic pricing all those years.
Rather, it was more than likely the banks
were knowingly and implicitly participating
in the optimistic pricing because it was
"good for loan business". It was never a
problem then, but became a problem now, only
because the borrower is no longer good risk.
Thus the principles of implicit ratification
and voluntary assumption of risk may apply.
Alternatively, the banks are grossly negligent.
As for Newegg, it may well be able to show that
it was, and has been, a victim, no less than the
banks, and had far less duty to scrutinize the
pricing than the banks, as loaners, had. Thus,
Newegg may be a victim of the banks' negligence.
If so, Newegg may have counter-claims against
the banks for the latter's gross negligence,
for malicious prosecution and scapegoating,
for defamation and trade libel, and for
attorneys' fees and court costs.
【在 E*********9 的大作中提到】
: Newegg因涉嫌诈骗数十亿美元的庞氏骗案而被起诉
: https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/newegg-sued-for-alleged-ponzi-scheme/
|
