Is there any?
16 replies (most recent on top)
Get your favorite beverage and read docket 2282 on PACER.
The pleading contains this gem, which any one of my former associates who got cut recognizes (especially the “explanations that make little sense” text):
- The Debtors’ initial response to the claims asserted in the Challenge Pleadings is to simply hand wave them away as “tak[ing] us through the looking glass and into Wonderland.” Admittedly, from being denied a seat at the table, to being offered (almost) nothing, and given explanations that make little sense, the Committee’s experience in these cases has, at times, resembled tea with the Mad Hatter,4 but we are far from Wonderland.
All week-long Kirkland’s lawyer, Nash, has been referring to the CHK witnesses as “Defendant.” It’s a bankruptcy case so the correct term is “debtor.”
The mistake has been causing much merriment on the blogs, especially with Lawler for whom the mistake is apropos. Lawler is not a defendant, but should be. More than a few have argued it’s a Freudian slip.
Finally, the judge had to correct Nash when he was questioning Del Osso. Nash responded that he had just gotten the d’s confused. His mind didn’t even register the fact that he had been making the mistake all week.
Nash can run the con nonstop. Nevertheless, you would think the $1500/hr. folks would be able to employ the basic vocabulary.
Lawler’s testimony may come back to haunt him. Lawler describes himself as a reluctant suitor for the Chesapeake job.
But, according to Lawler, the headhunters were beating a path to his door and after the headhunters gave him a couple of kicks in the arse, Lawler got his head in the game, not for money but for the “challenge.”
People on the blogs are saying he had just interviewed for a job with Marathon and was actively trying to find work.
When he does answer questions, which is not often, Lawler tries to come off as folksy and homespun, but it comes off as inauthentic, as just a red neck form of shucking and jiving. I can’t believe the judge has let him get away with his testimony.
After the perjuriously cornpone, Lawler’s testimony goes downhill fast. Unfortunately, Lawler doesn’t seem to know much about running Chesapeake, despite the time he’s spent with the business.
Lawler’s testimony and the skills Lawler displays in the court amount to nothing. There is no there there.
I wonder if the trustee can claw back the headhunter’s fee?
Don’t forget “I don’t know” which by far was the most common testimony of the Chesapeake Brain Trust.
The old boy network must be alive and well. That’s the only explanation for the transubstantiation of these very ordinary, common men into superstars.
What a farce.
I want my money back! Now.
No, not necessarily;
Not to my knowledge;
I wouldn’t characterize it so...
If you’re wondering, what does CHK get for the compensation it pays Lawler, DelOsso and its $1500/hr. lawyers, you just saw it in the first 3 lines of this post. Damn those people are dumb. The bankruptcy audio sounds like something out of a Monty Python movie.
Stunning, that’s the only word you can use to describe how worthless the c-suite people and their lawyers were to the well-being of Chesapeake.
What is the connection between Franklin and Kirkland? In the end, it seems the Franklin “advisors” were running CHK solely for the benefit of Franklin and to the extreme detriment of everyone else.
The CHK c-suite and the Kirkland lawyers couldn’t run a lemonade stand yet they got rich bankrupting a corporation. If you want to hear what a failure the US educational system is, listen to the audio of the superstars.
Where are the CEO supporters now? Do they finally realize? I know I'm not speaking of the employees we still have making videos and podcasts. Pay attention to that statement, let it sink in. All of these layoffs, and he is so concerned with his image he still employs expensive folks to supposedly ask "the questions we won't in a town hall". There has never been a single question asked in those that wasn't scripted. Way to push the envelope, yes man. The fact that so many great folks were forced to leave while we still have those types employed just shows how dysfunctional this organization truly is. At any rate, I'd love to hear people still try to justify the ceo's actions.
People that suddenly develop a stutter usually are liars. Lawler could barely speak at all.
The Unsecured Creditors Committee is not going to let this group of thieves go unpunished.
They will fight for the very last penny.
As someone wrote down in this thread, Chapter 7 and complete liquidation seems very possible at this point.
Every CHK employee and investor needs to listen to Lawler’s testimony yesterday in the Bankruptcy Court in Houston. A recording is available on PACER. After hearing Lawler, including how dumb he sounds with his ummms’s and uuuuhhhh’s, before Lawler non-answers questions, you will have no doubt how we ended up in bankruptcy. Lawler couldn’t answer any questions about how CHK was run. It seems most of the time Lawler was deferring to advisors. Lawler needed to defer to Del’Osso whose testimony promises to showcase as much incompetence. Where did those two clowns come from?
The lawyers from Kirkland sound as incompetent as Lawler. The audio is good for many, many laughs.
The Unsecured Creditors Committee lawyers chew both Lawler and the Kirland lawyers up. They ask Lawler if he previously knew how rich some people could get from a bankruptcy. By the end of the hearing, you can barely hear Lawler speak. Big Bad Doug laid low had to crawl off the stand with his tail between his legs.
Karma ruled the day.
Needless to say, the Judge didn’t thank Lawler for his evasive testimony
Is there a way to watch the hearing?
The wind is blowing on the house of cards!
RSA is the restructuring proposal
Sorry, what’s the RSA?
The judge indicated that the current RSA is DOA
Chapter 7 is getting closer.
Let’s enjoy our last Christmas lunch, and pray for our unemployed future :(
Doug Lawler, “The undeveloped acreage in the Eagle Ford is simply worth zero today. Nobody would buy it at any price.”
Unsecured Creditor Lawyer Jeff Jonas, “If it has zero value, would you hand it over to the unsecured creditors’ committee?”
Doug Lawler, “No.”
Jonas, “Well, then would you sell it to me for $100k?”
Lawler: “No.”