I have been laser-focused on Sammons from the revelation of his first letter. It was the strongest-yet manifestation of my thesis that the legal circus that has dragged on for 3+ years, with new suit after new suit being filed, would lead to an eventual free for all as plaintiffs line up for the biggest piece they can grab from what Mr. Sammons likely nailed as a pie worth up to $150 billion.
I have read all the blog and Twitter claptrap about how Mr. Sammons must be a government mole, stooge or some such ulterior-motivated raison d'etre. Most of those theories seem to circumstantially tie to the Sweeneython document release. And, I suppose, that could be the truth. I don't know; I am not Mr.Sammons, although I got a big laugh out of somebody suggesting I was, the other day. Maybe it's possible that Mr. Sammons looked at all the recent courtroom setbacks in Fanniegate, the continuum of delays for more and more discovery and the looming exit of Perry Capital... the litigation granddaddy in Fanniegate... and concluded that his interests were at risk, exactly as he stated.
When I read his letter, Mr. Sammons did not attack Judge Sweeney for releasing documents. His largest issue was her getting nothing done, at least as I read it. We just had an event many here are aware of where a longtime poster immersed in the GSE saga for years passed away and, sadly, never got to see any resolution or settlement after YEARS of waiting and hoping for one. Maybe Mr. Sammons doesn't want to suffer the same fate and believes a lower court with non-appointed judges and a faster track can deliver better results for his interests?
In the last few months there is a noticeable shift in Jacobs. Hindes and the Pagliara suits seeking remand to a lower or state court. Is the Sammons initiative just a part of a broader effort to grab some low hanging fruit with less pretense and move on with whatever spoils come their way? Or is some other motive driving these tactics? It seems far likelier to me that there is more connection that randomness in all this activity to remand. We will never know because "discovery" doesn't apply to plaintiffs backroom dealings, either real or imagined. In Fanniegate, the transparency factor only applies to government; the plaintiffs get a fee pass to keep any secrets hidden. Impure motives? Well, I just keep thinking about the divvy from that $150 billion pie...
JMHO.
JMHO.
