Re: [CR]Schwinn vs. Huffy - some perspective

(Example: Framebuilders:Brian Baylis)

From: Jerry & Liz Moos <jerrymoos@sbcglobal.net>
To: <DavidS4410@aol.com>
References: <32.3418afd1.2b7fd7c5@aol.com>
Subject: Re: [CR]Schwinn vs. Huffy - some perspective
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2003 12:42:15 -0600
cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org

Was Richard a participant in the business and a party to that agreement? Or was that an order of the bankruptcy judge? Those would seem the only two circumstances under which it would be binding on Richard.

Of course there is a similar circumstance with Alberto Masi having to sell bikes under the Milano name, but he may have been a party to that agreement.

Regards,

Jerry Moos
Houston, TX


----- Original Message -----
From: DavidS4410@aol.com
To: jerrymoos@sbcglobal.net
Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2003 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: [CR]Schwinn vs. Huffy - some perspective



> When Schwinn declared bankruptcy the first time, and was taken over by the
> Scott Sports Group, any use of the Schwinn name by a Schwinn family member in
> the bicycle business was specifically forbidden. This is why Richard Schwinn
> went ahead with Waterford Precision Cycles.
> Dave Staub
> Orange, Ca.