Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Bullboard - Stock Discussion Forum North American Gem Inc V.NAG

TSXV:NAG - Post Discussion

North American Gem Inc > Note the Filing Date
View:
Post by tactical on Apr 20, 2011 6:51pm

Note the Filing Date

Kentucky Mining Partners, LLC v. North American Gem, Inc.

Plaintiff: Kentucky Mining Partners, LLC
Defendant: North American Gem, Inc.
Case Number: 6:2011cv00030
Filed: January 21, 2011
Court: Kentucky Eastern District Court
Office: London Office
County: Knox
Presiding Judge: Gregory F. VanTatenhove
Nature of Suit: Torts - Property - Other Fraud
Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud
Jurisdiction: Diversity
Jury Demanded By: Defendant
Comment by Saturn4 on Apr 20, 2011 9:03pm
If you check Sedar ... you might have seen it earlier ... stop this incessant B.S. over nothing .... NAG has other real problems -- the lawsuit is not one of them IMO .... Get a contractor, get mining, get drilling, sell W.V. --- Get something done NAG!!
Comment by tactical on Apr 21, 2011 1:33pm
My apologies S4, I didn't realize that I had to take into consideration your thoughts on what is relevant before posting my thoughts. Regardless, I've never been one to allow someone to bully me into staying quiet, so feel free to put me on ignore if you don't like what I have to say. I believe the court issue has great relevance, as I believe Nag was aware in January that a suit was ...more  
Comment by Porsche928S4 on Apr 21, 2011 1:59pm
I do not recognize you're alias but reviewing you're summary details you have been a member since 2000 and have managed to post for 12 years yet have few ignores.     I agree with what you have stated and I'm sure a large percentage of other readers also agree.    NAG knew about this court order prior to the 2nd last PP and plenty of people stated that they had ...more  
Comment by Saturn4 on Apr 21, 2011 2:20pm
Fair enough.  I didn't see it from the perspective of those who bought into the PP ...
Comment by SUCYN on Apr 21, 2011 4:31pm
Porche, I bought in on 0.08 PP and don't regret it...I just wished that I would have sold them for 0.10 and kept the warrants...I did sell half at 0.07...The warrants are good for three years and if this company ever gets it's stuff ( stuff, that's a kind word for what they are doing) together I could make some nice money on those warrants..Yes, I am a gambler...SUCYN
Comment by Z06 on Apr 21, 2011 6:27pm
Gambler maybe, but i can't figure out why your not mad as hell that the company screwed you by keeping this a secret for so long. You have been raped.
Comment by SUCYN on Apr 21, 2011 10:18pm
ZO6,I am mad, but but not much that I can do now, so I don't rant....I lost about $8,000, but I'm still hoping that I can recover with the warrants...Ha...I'm more upset that I didn't buy INT at 0.60 when Saturn was telling me to buy it...It went to 3.30 before pulling back...SUCYN