Basic HTML Version
1
that it would be much more costly, and ultimately, therefore,
2
an unnecessary drain on the charitable trusts to put the
3
receiver in the position of having to rescind a consummated
4
transaction when he might be able to avoid an unconsummated
5
transaction.
6
Now, I will point out to the Court, too, that
7
if t�e transaction is not consummated, the chances are good
8
of litigating this matter in California. If they are
9
consummated, the chances are good we will have to litigate
10
it in Texas.
11
My experience with Texas law is that they have a
12
somewhat different view of the applicable principles than
13
the California courts, and it takes a little while getting
14
acclimated to it.
15
Now, I don't know if I have snswered Your Honor's
16
question about the scope of your writ and the extent of your
17
jurisdiction.
18
THE COURT: What about the ex parte nature? I read
19
your moving papers, I read your movinq declaration, and some-
20
one seems to be alarmed at the potential for file shredding
21
or the destruction of documents or records.
22
MR. TAPPER: Maybe I could dispel that, Judge.
23
24
25
26
27
28
THE COURT: Go ahead.
MR. TAPPER: I am reminded of the words of Shirley
Hufstedler when she was in the Court of Appeal, and it was
no more certain as to the plaintiff's rights in terms of
their being finally defined as it is here, but there is strong
reason to be suspicious, and she said, "What the defendant
6