Dover Corporation and Subsidiaries - Page 20

                                       - 20 -                                         
          consisted of a letter to respondent’s counsel enclosing a copy of           
          an opinion of U.K. counsel that, under English law, July 11,                
          1997, was the actual date on which the sale of the H&C stock was            
          completed.                                                                  
               Respondent objects to petitioner’s motion on the ground that           
          (1) respondent’s position is nothing more than a legitimate legal           
          argument and (2) petitioner has not shown that respondent’s                 
          arguments are “redundant, immaterial, impertinent, frivolous, or            
          scandalous matter” within the meaning of Rule 52.                           
               In essence, petitioner’s motion raises the issue of whether            
          we should strike respondent’s attack on petitioner’s argument               
          that the sale of the H&C stock occurred on July 11, 1997, the               
          date referred to in the stock sale agreement as the “escrow                 
          release date”, rather than on June 30, 1997, the date of that               
          agreement and the date represented by petitioner to be the date             
          of sale in the request for 9100 relief.  In framing that issue,             
          the parties have assumed that, were we to find that the stock               
          sale occurred on July 11, 1997, rather than on June 30, 1997,               
          there necessarily would be an 11-day period between the deemed              
          liquidation of H&C into Dover UK and Dover UK’s deemed sale of              
          the H&C operating assets, during which period Dover UK must be              
          deemed to have operated the H&C business as its own.  Under those           
          circumstances, petitioner’s assertion that Dover UK’s deemed sale           
          of the H&C operating assets constituted a sale of property used             






Page:  Previous  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011