That’s how Wright Pierce’s attorney’s characterized Wolfeboro’s attempt to amend their lawsuit to include allegations of fraud.  Their objection lays-out our attorneys, chapter and verse,  for “cherry picking” emails and advancing allegations based on “pure speculation and innuendo”.

Additionally, they argue that our lawyers didn’t even get right their brief about applicable law under which an amended complaint can be filed.  The court agreed in their denial of the amended complaint.

In their summary, WP’s attorney’s say:

For all of the above reasons, this Court should deny Wolfeboro leave to amend its Complaint because the good cause standard has not been met. The purpose of Rule 16 is to “assure that at some point . . . the pleadings will be fixed.” O’Connell , 357 F.3d at 154. Although Wolfeboro has cherry-picked phrases of emails and quoted them out of context, Wolfeboro has failed to satisfy the heightened pleading standard and particularity requirements under Rule 9(b). Specifically, Wolfeboro has not specified the time, place, and content of an alleged false or fraudulent misrepresentation, and, therefore, has only demonstrated the futility of the claims it seeks to assert which amount to “nothing more than ‘[a] Hail Mary pass.’”

I can’t wait for the trial.