FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.

[doughishere]

Just a quick question/comment. I gather that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is completely separate and distinct from the Court of Appeals, DC Circuit.

 

I guess the idea might be that "executive privilege" is a specialized issue and so they send it to the Federal Circuit rather than the DC Circuit. An implication of that specialization might be that they are "used to" the issue and have procedures in place to deal with it expeditiously. Judge Sweeney already did the in camera review, so the Federal Circuit would look at it again de novo, but with the benefit of having read Judge Sweeney's decision.

 

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.

[doughishere]

" To date, Fannie and Freddie have paid the government $246 billion in dividends."

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/fannie-mae-freddie-mac-shareholders-argue-against-governments-profit-sweep-1460757430

 

 

 

Think about that for a second. Thats like an entire JPMorgan Chase. 11th on the list of the S&P500 list.

[Guest cherzeca]

i have attached below govt's mandamus brief.

 

my take is that govt objects more to the manner in which sweeney reviewed the docs (rote and dismissive) than to sweeney's application of the law. 

 

the important point is that the standard of review is to see if sweeney committed clear errors of law.  i dont see how the govt has done that in the brief. 

 

in each case, sweeney assumed the docs were covered by the privileges asserted, even after noting that it was unclear looking at the docs on their face. so this whole discussion of sweeney's dismissive review of the docs is besides the point since she assumed the docs were covered by privileges, and she went on to conclude that the Ps need of the docs to litigate and that the docs would be subject to a protective seal led her to rule in favor of Ps.

 

at best govt argues that govt internal communications will be chilled even when docs are produced under seal.  i dont see any legal authority for that proposition cited by govt. it is just that the govt knows better, and therefore sweeney got it wrong.

 

i would think the cooper&kirk reply brief will slam this govt brief.

govt_mandamus_brief.pdf

[waynepolsonAtoZ]

Thks. I had thought that the honorable Judge Sweeney had written an appeal proof decision, if there is such a thing. I would think that this would be the kind of case where a court would be expected to act expeditiously.

 

Confidentiality agreements or the equivalent are used all the time in discovery. I assume that "documents produced under seal" is like a confidentiality agreement on steroids.

 

I had to sign a confidentiality agreement in one of the cases I'm involved in. One has to take that seriously.

 

I'm not a lawyer, but lawyers would (I understand) be subject to sanctions if they somehow violated a confidentiality agreement  and were caught doing so.

[doughishere]

Q3 Earnings this week or next.

 

 

Edit: I think it will be this Thursday. Same date as fairholme reply to the govts request for a mandamus.

[waynepolsonAtoZ]

An attorney referred me to the attached document and pointed me to page 6. This has to do with the legal standard re a mandamus.

In_re_Queens_University_at_Kingston.pdf

[Luke 532]

Lawyers, thoughts on the attached?

 

FHFA drops opposition to settlement involving Freddie Mac and PwC.

55-Withdrawal.pdf

[deadspace]

Has anyone give  some thought o what the market rate would be to have access to a line of credit for $100 billion.

The issue came up in the appeals discussion but as i recall it was never settled.

 

I could see a  appeals court ruling suggesting that such a fee is appropriate and then the issue becomes what would the annual fee become and could it be substantial enough to push the companies into liquidation anyway ?

 

 

[waynepolsonAtoZ]

Rather than a line of credit, would it be financial recapitalization, i.e., raising a $100 b of book common equity capital that you are talking about?

[deadspace]

Rather than a line of credit, would it be financial recapitalization, i.e., raising a $100 b of book common equity capital that you are talking about?

 

I'm specifically talking about what treasury calls the comittment fee.  But after re listening to the Hume appeals discussion he brings up that it was valued much lower than what the net worth sweep took from the companies.  Beyond that I don't know how one can sort out a private market value for such a thing

[Luke 532]

Podesta e-mail (via Wikileaks) discussing FHFA and uses terms such as "nationalized" https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5956

 

[Luke 532]

Epstein...Further Stalling on Fannie and Freddie Discovery

http://www.forbes.com/sites/richardepstein/2016/10/31/further-stalling-on-fannie-and-freddie-discovery/#145035e125ef

[doughishere]

So it seems in Edwards vs. PWC plantifs have received money from PWC.

a) not suprising since its been so hush hush and the reaction by govt. lawyers.

b) can anyone find the transcript Im sure it will come out in due time but it should be worth reading.......

 

[Luke 532]

From Peter A. Chapman...

 

The government filed a Notice this afternoon advising that it has delivered paper copies of the 56 documents to the Federal Circuit as directed in the Court's Oct. 27 order.  A copy of the Notice is attached to this e-mail message.

17-104-0015.pdf

[waynepolsonAtoZ]

Q. Re that mandamus re 56 documents “executive privilege” at the federal court of claims, is this something a magistrate judge could take care of or would it be a three judge panel?

 

A. There are no magistrates at the Court of Appeals level, so I think the question is: does the petition go straight to a merits panel (such as would review any normal appeal) or does it go to a rotating motions panel? The Federal Circuit’s operating procedures indicate that it would be the latter. See IOP 2.9. Either way, however, a three-judge panel would review the petition. It’s unclear to me whether any order issued by the motions panel reveals the names of the judges who considered the petition.

http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/rules-of-practice/IOPs/IOPsMaster1a.pdf

 

[muscleman]

Seriously, this is the legal system and separation of power that we are betting on?

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fbi-director-comey-congress-new-letter-hillary-clinton-emails-still-no-charges/

 

[Luke 532]

DeMarco: "It is time for the end of the conservatorships — and taxpayer risk that it brings — of Fannie and Freddie."

http://www.timesnews.net/Business/2016/11/07/Unfinished-business.html?ci=featured&lp=1&ti=

[Luke 532]

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?

 

Corrigan opinion released today. https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/

[waynepolsonAtoZ]

Judge Brown dissents on "qualified immunity." She sides with law enforcement and thinks what they did in the 1st search was within the bounds of their discretion, although the 2nd one wasn't, keeping in mind that law enforcement had to act quickly despite imperfect and asymmetric information.

 

Stretching the point to apply to GSEs, is the 3rd Amendment deserving of the equivalent of qualified immunity? I don't think so and the discovery that has been given to the appeals court makes it clearer that what Tsy/FHFA said was the basis of the 3rd Amendment wasn't actually the true basis. Still, a court will be cautious when overturning the gov't.

 

Again stretching a bit, I've always thought that a judge would have a hard time second guessing Tsy/FHFA at the time of the 2008 financial crisis, but what they did on August 17, 2012 seems different. I think the discovery stuff helps. I also think that Judge Brown will tend to be reluctant to agree that HERA of 2008 gives Tsy/FHFA "unqualified immunity," i.e., that can do whatever it wants without court oversight. Constitution in exile federalist society type judges like Brown and Ginsburg would tend to be skeptical about giving a regulator like FHFA too much discretion, not to mention that the Tsy isn't supposed to oversee (direct and supervise) FHFA, which is pretty clearly what it does via the SPSPAs.

 

I can see why this decision took awhile. Brown had to finish her dissent and then Judge Rogers had to explain why the majority "dissented from the dissent." That takes time. This isn't unlike what happens when a three member public utility commission deals with when there is a dissent in a big case. Most decisions are immediately issued, but the orders in big cases with dissents can take much longer.

 

 

[Guest cherzeca]

Has anyone give  some thought o what the market rate would be to have access to a line of credit for $100 billion.

The issue came up in the appeals discussion but as i recall it was never settled.

 

I could see a  appeals court ruling suggesting that such a fee is appropriate and then the issue becomes what would the annual fee become and could it be substantial enough to push the companies into liquidation anyway ?

 

millett asked what that commitment fee was valued at, and govt respond that it had never valued it

 

edit:  now, someone like ginsburg might well consider an exchange of no commitment fee for NWS to be arbitrary and capricious if the value of the commitment fee was never determined. but i dont see that as necessary for remand given other issues in case

[Guest cherzeca]

Judge Brown dissents on "qualified immunity." She sides with law enforcement and thinks what they did in the 1st search was within the bounds of their discretion, although the 2nd one wasn't, keeping in mind that law enforcement had to act quickly despite imperfect and asymmetric information.

 

Stretching the point to apply to GSEs, is the 3rd Amendment deserving of the equivalent of qualified immunity? I don't think so and the discovery that has been given to the appeals court makes it clearer that what Tsy/FHFA said was the basis of the 3rd Amendment wasn't actually the true basis. Still, a court will be cautious when overturning the gov't.

 

Again stretching a bit, I've always thought that a judge would have a hard time second guessing Tsy/FHFA at the time of the 2008 financial crisis, but what they did on August 17, 2012 seems different. I think the discovery stuff helps. I also think that Judge Brown will tend to be reluctant to agree that HERA of 2008 gives Tsy/FHFA "unqualified immunity," i.e., that can do whatever it wants without court oversight. Constitution in exile federalist society type judges like Brown and Ginsburg would tend to be skeptical about giving a regulator like FHFA too much discretion, not to mention that the Tsy isn't supposed to oversee (direct and supervise) FHFA, which is pretty clearly what it does via the SPSPAs.

 

I can see why this decision took awhile. Brown had to finish her dissent and then Judge Rogers had to explain why the majority "dissented from the dissent." That takes time. This isn't unlike what happens when a three member public utility commission deals with when there is a dissent in a big case. Most decisions are immediately issued, but the orders in big cases with dissents can take much longer.

 

corrigan and perry are totally not analogous.  no question in perry as to whether geithner should have personal liability for NWS

[waynepolsonAtoZ]

I believe you re totally not analogous. But, I'm not a lawyer so I don't really know (or care for that matter). Just fooling around to distract myself at the end of this terrible election season.

[Guest cherzeca]

i have no idea what trump's view of the GSEs may be.  does anyone have any view on what he thinks about GSEs?

 

at least we wont hear sperling pontificate about it...

[hardincap]

john paulson and icahn, both gse investors, are a part of his economic policy team. otoh, he and corker have a close relationship.

 

given that he has so much of his assets in real estate, however, i'd think hed be friendly to the gses.

[Guest cherzeca]

john paulson and icahn, both gse investors, are a part of his economic policy team. otoh, he and corker have a close relationship.

 

given that he has so much of his assets in real estate, however, i'd think hed be friendly to the gses.

 

right.  as an investor, i would think trump would think the NWS was just another instance of obama administration overreach