You say: "Not unusual for multiple people within a corporatoin/company to be able to bind the company in legal issues."

I can tell you from experience that this statement is incorrect.  While PTSC is not ISO9000 certified (specifying requirements for an Approval Authority System), every company has a set of approval requirements based on type of action contemplated and dollar thresholds.  All authorities must sign, especially the President/CEO.  In the case of very high dollar values, the Chairman of the Board would also be a required approval authority.

Compliance with the company's own internal "rules" is extremely important, for if the signing authority is not truly authorized to make the commitment for the company, the contract is not binding.  Thus, it also places a burden on the customer/opposing party to assure that all required signature authorities have signed. 

When negotiating a contract (off site), the team leader typically gets authority to sign up to a designated dollar amount, i.e., the necessary authorities have signed in advance up to that threshold. If the negotiations result in an amount that exceeds that threshold, everything stops until authority is granted (approvals gained at HQ for the higher amount).

I was the "resident expert" of the approval authority system at a subsibiary of Hughes Aircraft, and then at Raytheon.  Raytheon was excessively "tight" on granting such authority.  Any commitment involving more than $10M required approval from Corporate, necessitating a trip to Boston to make a presentation and gain signatures.  Keep in mind that in the defense/aerospace industry, $10M is relative "peanuts".  Over $50M required approval of the Chairman.  And at Hughes (owned by GM), over $50M required approvals by the BoD at GM.  These approvals AFTER all the approvals by various disciplines at each level in the corporate hierachy.  This info is ten years old.

Now, look at little ole PTSC.  Look at the probable dollar amounts for a settlement(s).  I would think that the CLO, CFO, CEO/President and Chairman would have to sign on virtually everything of significant value (unless they are in a coma).  And recognizing the customer's/opposition's need to assure the proper authorities have signed to make the deal binding, I'd think PTSC would have everyone sign to enable that assurance.

You may argue that PTSC is so small, and not bound by ISO or other similar requirements, that it could do whatever it wants.  Again not true, as they are a publicly held corporation, and must have such checks and balances in place to protect shareholders (you can't have company officers running around making commitments with no internal coordination).

Based on the dollar values involved here, I strongly suspect that all PTSC signing parties would be on site for the signature party.

JMHO,

SGE

PS: A lesson in such things can be learned from a case in the 1930's, involving none other than the Three Stooges.  They came a CA seeking a movie deal.  All three stooges had authority to obligate the team.  Two stooges separately signed contracts with two studios in the same morning of the same day.  It wound up in court, and the first-signed contract was binding.  So they ended up in an open-ended contract with the lesser of the two studios, making a fixed $500 each for ever, doing road trips/shows and some ridiculous number of "B" movies per year.  The other studio picked up Abbot and Costello for a much better contract.  IF the Stooges had set up a better approval system, they would have done a LOT better.  But, alas, they were the Three Stooges!