Quote from: Haplo on September 17, 2012, 12:35:21 AM

I do have a question, though. Assuming we do manage to force pirate and associates to cough up, either by returning what was stolen and/or by liquidating their property, is there a reasonable process that we could arrange a legal agreement for how those funds will be distributed before we get a ruling? I could only imagine a series of disasters following without such an agreement.

Excellent question. The only way what you can achieve what you are asking for is if a class action lawsuit is filed. A criminal undertaking by the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Justice Department would not allow for this result.

Basically a class action lawsuit would be filed against pirate and whoever else. At that point a lead or lead plaintiffs would be nominated, and the court would either grant or deny the Rule 23 Class Action lawsuit to proceed. The lead plaintiffs are just the names on the lawsuit basically. Now at any time the "plaintiffs" (all of the injured parties) could agree amongst themselves in the form of a contract as to how they will split any proceeds. At this point it could really only be decided upon a percentage basis after legal fees and litigation cost, as no one knows how much there actually is left.

There is no rule of ethics that would prevent this (there is an ethics rule that dictates the procedure the attorney must take in this agreement Model Rules of Professional Conduct 1.8(g)), and I cannot think of any contractual rule that would bar this type of contract.

Quote

1.8(g) - A lawyer who represents two or more clients shall not participate in making an aggregate settlement of the claims of or against the clients, or in a criminal case an aggregated agreement as to guilty or nolo contendere pleas, unless each client gives informed consent, in a writing signed by the client. The lawyer's disclosure shall include the existence and nature of all the claims or pleas involved and of the participation of each person in the settlement.