doughishere

As far as I can tell before reading briefs this is an interlocutory appeal (not final judgement) which will be reviewed under a rather stringent clear error of law standard. This is same for all federal courts. Not de novo review Thats next.

Seems like a pretty quick turnaround! All I wanna do is zoom zoom..... Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 21(b)(6) directs that a mandamus "proceeding must be given preference over ordinary civil cases."

Our government has advised Judge Sweeney that it intends to seek review of her Sept. 20 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and a copy of the government's notice of appeal is attached. 13-465-0346.pdf

See screenshot in case the link breaks.

http://fortune.com/2016/10/26/freddie-mac-pwc-auditor-suit-settled/ U.S. Angered as Freddie Mac Auditor Settles Investor Suit

This is ending up being like teh end of a basketball game where one of the teams is down 10 points with 5 seconds left and keeps hacking just to stop the clock and the only thing its doing is sending the winning team to the line for 2.

Attached above. It only 3 pages long. 1 The appeal was argued over six months ago, and the D.C. Circuit already has decided the overwhelming majority, by our account well over 95%, of the cases heard last term.

The Edwards Plaintiffs submitted their response to FHFA's motions for reconsideration and a copy of the settlement agreement yesterday evening. The Edwards Plaintiffs tell Judge Moreno there's nothing for him to do because the case has concluded and he has no jurisdiction to do anything further. The Edwards Plaintiffs suggest that Judge Moreno should also cancel the hearing he scheduled for Oct. 31. "Simply stated, there is no longer any case pending before this Court." lol. 16-cv-21224-0053.pdf

God, what assholes. What would the process be like if the govt did want to receive a writ of mandamus from Federal Circuit?...like I think they want.

Fairholme submitted an emergency order to Judge Sweeney yesterday evening seeking enforcement of her Sept. 20 order directing the government to produce the 56 documents she said aren't privileged. Fairholme wants to share these 56 documents with the D.C. Circuit. The government intends to ask the Federal Circuit to review Judge Sweeney's Sept. 20 order. 13-465-0344.pdf

The FHFA wants to see the settlement between two private parties(Edwards v. PWC). Most likely to see how they want to precede elsewhere. Off Subject: John Lester is 32 and getting paid $20M, for christ sake learn to throw the ball to first base!!!

+1

https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress-2015-2016/reports/52089-gse-report.pdf The Effects of Increasing Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s Capital. CBO

A part of me thinks this might be settled before Hillary takes office. Edit: A large part of my reasoning comes from this latest shareholder lawsuit that got dropped with prejudice....If my reasoning is right, big if, the shareholders really have no reason to settle and if they loose then why drop?Why not at least finish this out and if its a loss then yhy not take it the next step. Also, that conference call a week or so ago with the lawyers from investors unite(I think one of them was an actual lawyer from they seemed pretty sure of themselves. Also, the govt has 62 reasons to settle..... Edit 2: The govt has 56 reasons and one of the lawyers was a partner with Cooper and Kirk.

I was actually surprised it got such little attention on here...tbh.

I can do some of the Intern work. Act Now to Stop War U.S. Assoc of Reptile Keepers <--- Reptiles are a hot topic these days. City of Duluth Matthew Corrigan Perry Capital USA vs Nizar Trabelsi <---Soccer Player gone Terrorist. Prelim list. More edits to come as I go down Meph's list. Is there a location to find the cases heard during last term?

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-unconstitutional-mr-cordray-1476227389 http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/court-rules-consumer-financial-protection-bureaus-structure-is-unconstitutional/503660/

In the United States Court of Federal Claims, the only permissible relief is just compensation for the property taken, plus interest from the time of the taking. This Epstein article is great. Huge Respek(what movie) for Judge Sweeney . Epstein stays on the attack: Anyone know if Epstein and Obama taught at UChicago together back before the President was the President? I dont think this is just about the shareholders of Freddie and Freddie.....this is a mental joust between 2 legal scholars. Edit:I just asked a friend, who attended UChicago Laws School, about Obamas time as an adjunct. They may have taught together. "His formal title was "senior lecturer," but the University of Chicago Law School says he "served as a professor" and was "regarded as" a professor." http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/obama-a-constitutional-law-professor/ If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. - Newton

if you look at prices before lamberth decision, you will see 4ish for common and 8ish for pref...anticipating a P win no doubt. but if you get a remand from appeals ct, i dont know why the price action wouldnt go higher than that (at least confirmation that lamberth was wrong is more valuable than optimism pre-lamberth, no?)...and of course much higher if reversal https://seventeenmile.com/2015/06/23/special-situations-fannie-mae-raisins-analysis-june-2015/ FNMAS has traded since August 2012 (FNMA’s PPS is in parentheses): Pre-NWS (August 10, 2012): $2.30 ($.28) Post-NWS (October 5, 2012): $.83 ($.28) Pre-Fairholme (March 8, 2013): $1.87 ($.29) Post-Fairholme MT High (May 24, 2013): $6.14 ($2.97) Pre-Lamberth High (March 7, 2014): $12.31 ($5.33) Post-Lamberth Low (October 8, 2014): $3.35 ($1.72) Post-Lamberth High (May 1, 2015): $5.06 ($2.82) Most Recent PPS (June 22, 2015): $3.81 ($2.43) You know I dont think ive looked at the price in over a year.... Ive had general idea of where it is/was but never actively looked it up.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/richardepstein/2016/10/06/discovery-made-simple-in-fannie-and-freddie/#7f6cb51c3637 Prof. Epstein.

common is most likely to get 0 damages though....im open to other opinions on that.

I think damages are still speculation at this point. There would be a combination of factors and I just dont have the time to go through every class and determine the cash flows associate with each class, IF there even are damages. I know lazy....... I know what I own and have an idea of how its going to "payout"....again if they do. Edit: and by class I mean series.

Ahh....thanks....i get what your saying.....not all preferreds are the same despite what people think. Would it not boil down to the callable date for each issue? Seems to me like thats a better way to determine the damages. Keep in mind folks some preffereds are so old that Bear Stearns underwrote them. All preffereds are not the same.

I missed the call. Merk, can you elaborate on that last comment?

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/10/04/john-yoo-ultra-secret-obama-white-house-ignores-our-constitution-again.html John Yoo: The ultra-secret Obama White House ignores our Constitution (again)