disinfozone/The_Info_Web
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

vault backup: 2026-10-16 01:25:00

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
disinfo.zone 2026-10-16 01:25:00 -04:00
parent 837c566626
commit 9173c41b79
No known key found for this signature in database
199 changed files with 10378 additions and 1741 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
10 - PEOPLE/(T-Z)/Peter Videnieks.md
View file

@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ Bason's conclusions on the conduct of the department included the finding that t
Bason also found that in February 1985, after Brewer had talked to [[Thomas Stanton]], Rugh telephoned Videnieks and said there was "no way" the INSLAW bankruptcy would continue as a Chapter 11 case.[^16] Videnieks' handwritten note of the call, dated 2/20/85, is quoted in the Bua report, which also recorded that Rugh and Videnieks each said the note reflected Rugh's belief that INSLAW would end in chapter 7 liquidation, and that the report found their reading of the note reasonable and consistent with the other evidence.[^17]
On March 14, 1986, shortly after INSLAW declared bankruptcy, INSLAW's counsel [[Leigh Ratiner]] wrote to Videnieks as the contracting officer that any continued use of the enhanced PROMIS software without INSLAW's consent contravened its property rights as a debtor and violated the automatic stay.[^18] The [[United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit|D.C. Circuit]] reversed the stay-violation judgment on May 7, 1991, writing that the automatic stay "does not reach the Department's use of property in its possession under a claim of right at the time of the bankruptcy filing, even if that use may ultimately prove to violate the bankrupt's rights," and that the bankruptcy court had no jurisdiction to hear the claims asserted under section 362(a). Rehearing was denied on July 12, 1991.[^19]
On March 14, 1986, shortly after INSLAW declared bankruptcy, INSLAW's counsel [[Leigh Ratiner]] wrote to Videnieks as the contracting officer that any continued use of the enhanced PROMIS software without INSLAW's consent contravened its property rights as a debtor and violated the automatic stay.[^18] The [[United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit|D.C. Circuit]] reversed the stay-violation judgment on May 7, 1991, writing that the automatic stay "does not reach the Department's use of property in its possession under a claim of right at the time of the bankruptcy filing, even if that use may ultimately prove to violate the bankrupt's rights," and that the bankruptcy court had no jurisdiction to hear the claims asserted under section 362(a). Rehearing was denied on July 12, 1991.[^19] The opinion records that INSLAW filed a claim with "the contracting officer" on October 17, 1985 and that the contracting officer ruled against INSLAW on February 21, 1986; it does not give his name.[^19]
### Customs and the Hadron allegation