I believe it because it makes sense.<quoted text>
"Although the terms of the settlement have not been released to the public" ..........and even though the "Compromise" was approved by the court the day before the scheduled hearing and was then added to the docket information, you believe what Weiner writes?
My but you your prior scepticism toward the reliability of media stories seems to have vanished.
If you go back to the beginning when Casey filed for bankruptcy, she listed all creditors, including those holding legitimate claims as well as those holding possible potential claims.
Any and all on that list had the right to dispute that their claims be discharged by the bankruptcy court.
So fast forward several months and lo and behold, the disputed claim filed by TES is settled out of court. The settlement agreement "allows" TES to remain on the list of creditors, exactly as they were listed in the original filing.
When and IF this simple bankruptcy gets discharged, all of those "undisputed claims" will be wiped out.
Nowhere is there a provision for a claim to be "discharged with qualifiers", for obvious reasons.
That's why it makes sense that Casey does NOT have to admit any liability, regardless of whether or not JW has the "inside scoop".
Further, again for obvious reasons, there is a standard paragraph in a "settlement" agreement:
"The Parties desire to settle all disputes and claims which exist or which may exist between and among them arising out of the facts, matters, and events set forth above, without admitting any liability."