Author Topic: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.  (Read 2810354 times)

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1539
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #9410 on: February 20, 2018, 01:23:50 PM »
Supreme Court denied hearing.  ::)
Does this mean Perry case is officially dead, and the only legal pathway forward is the Sweeney case?

to the lawyers on the board:  although they are longshots in their own right, would the other outstanding cases in the 3 appeals courts + rop/bhatti be hurt by this supreme court ruling (ie is it viewed as a 'blessing' of the dc ruling)?  thank you.

muscleman, i think it's sweeney (which is years away from any potential positive outcome), delaware appeal, and maybe some pennies from the lamberth remand as remaining legal options. plus the longshot perry look-a-like suits mentioned above sprinkled around the country.

a denial of cert does not touch the merits.  if a circuit wanted to rule for Ps (big if) then it would know that its case conflicting with  perry would result in a likely grant of cert by scotus.  but generally other circuits are inclined to say hey this is an administrative law case, i'll just decide the way the dc circuit decided cause they handle more such cases


HalfMeasure

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 126
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #9411 on: February 20, 2018, 03:14:37 PM »
Supreme Court denied hearing.  ::)
Does this mean Perry case is officially dead, and the only legal pathway forward is the Sweeney case?

to the lawyers on the board:  although they are longshots in their own right, would the other outstanding cases in the 3 appeals courts + rop/bhatti be hurt by this supreme court ruling (ie is it viewed as a 'blessing' of the dc ruling)?  thank you.

muscleman, i think it's sweeney (which is years away from any potential positive outcome), delaware appeal, and maybe some pennies from the lamberth remand as remaining legal options. plus the longshot perry look-a-like suits mentioned above sprinkled around the country.

a denial of cert does not touch the merits.  if a circuit wanted to rule for Ps (big if) then it would know that its case conflicting with  perry would result in a likely grant of cert by scotus.  but generally other circuits are inclined to say hey this is an administrative law case, i'll just decide the way the dc circuit decided cause they handle more such cases

Wasn't the cert also rather narrow in its scope anyway?

cherzeca

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1539
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #9412 on: February 20, 2018, 03:54:34 PM »
@1/2
not really.  two claims were directed to invalidate NWS.

Seahug

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #9413 on: February 20, 2018, 06:49:13 PM »
So are we screwed and should we sell?

Except that seems best time to buy this is when absolutely looks hopeless and NOT when there is good news.

Seahug

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #9414 on: February 20, 2018, 07:20:03 PM »
I intend to hold. I think there's still that RNC resolution to release FNMA and settle.

Eye4Valu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 345
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #9415 on: February 20, 2018, 10:41:49 PM »
My take for a while has been that our best shot legally is in the Court of Claims. It still makes sense to me that Mnuchin will eventually implement reasonable administrative reform that is positive for all stakeholders. If not, Sweeney is not a bad Plan B. 

orthopa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 559
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #9416 on: February 21, 2018, 05:36:29 AM »
This turned from a legal case to an administrative case the day Mnuchin was picked for Secretary. This may have prodded action a little sooner but otherwise was meaningless.

Midas79

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 338
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #9417 on: February 21, 2018, 06:33:46 AM »
Tim Howard weighed in on the potential impact of the "quick peek" documents in the amended complaint due tomorrow.

https://howardonmortgagefinance.com/2018/02/05/waiting-for-mr-corker/#comment-5907

In particular he mentions the Perry remanded case and the Fairholme case as the main beneficiaries:

Quote
The Perry Capital remand (breach of contract and fiduciary duty) and the Court of Claims case (regulatory takings) are where the government’s bad actions will be of the greatest value: the more blatant and obvious the government’s behavior with respect to Fannie and Freddie, the greater the damages that are likely to be awarded should plaintiffs ultimately prevail in these cases.

Apologies if this has been mentioned before, but if the court eventually does award damages would they only go to the plaintiffs, all shareholders who own the same class and series of shares as the plaintiffs, all junior preferred holders, or some other combination? Is that up to the judge or is it specifically requested in the complaint?

rros

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 773
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #9418 on: February 21, 2018, 06:44:19 AM »
Tim Howard weighed in on the potential impact of the "quick peek" documents in the amended complaint due tomorrow.

https://howardonmortgagefinance.com/2018/02/05/waiting-for-mr-corker/#comment-5907

In particular he mentions the Perry remanded case and the Fairholme case as the main beneficiaries:

Quote
The Perry Capital remand (breach of contract and fiduciary duty) and the Court of Claims case (regulatory takings) are where the government’s bad actions will be of the greatest value: the more blatant and obvious the government’s behavior with respect to Fannie and Freddie, the greater the damages that are likely to be awarded should plaintiffs ultimately prevail in these cases.

Apologies if this has been mentioned before, but if the court eventually does award damages would they only go to the plaintiffs, all shareholders who own the same class and series of shares as the plaintiffs, all junior preferred holders, or some other combination? Is that up to the judge or is it specifically requested in the complaint?
I have to double check but I think at least Perry expressly covered all preferred holders. Will get back on this.

This is in the ruling by the appeals court. Does this answer your question?
Quote
We remand this claim, insofar as it seeks damages, for the district court to evaluate it under the correct legal standard, namely, whether the Third Amendment violated the reasonable expectations of the parties at the various times the class plaintiffs purchased their shares. We note that the class plaintiffs specifically allege that some class members purchased their shares before the Recovery Act was enacted in July 2008 and the FHFA was appointed conservator the following September, while others purchased their shares later, but the class plaintiffs define their class action to include more broadly “all persons and entities who held shares . . . and who were damaged thereby,”
I believe the appeals court later changed a bit their stance regarding subdividing classes. 
« Last Edit: February 21, 2018, 07:09:45 AM by rros »

SnarkyPuppy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 673
Re: FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.
« Reply #9419 on: February 21, 2018, 08:56:10 AM »
"Who held" - what about those of us who bought in 2013+?