Fannie Mae Preferred S (FNMAS)

[rosen62]

Their paragraphs 5), 6) may not do as there is already court opinion (CAROLINE HERRON, Plaintiff, v. FANNIE MAE, et al. Defendants. 4/30/12) stating Fannie Mae was never made part of the government (not nationalized). That same opinion stated that FHFA -taking the role of shareholder- also had (has) a private role as it stepped into (the shoes) the private role of Fannie Mae. Judge Collyer also opined that Treasury has the interests of a shareholder via its warrants holdings and Sr. preferreds.

The damage caused by "nationalizating" the companies may not fly as that has never happened. At least, in the eyes of one court.

AND the conservatorship has still not ended (work in progress). Meaning both companies' health could still be restored, as per FHFA's stated mission. In this regard, the court opined that the conservatorship had full control of the companies but was temporary, NOT permanent. And don't forget both common shares and Jrs. are still trading in the open market. The shares have not been eliminated, which would have caused permanent damage.

PSPA unlawful? Not sure about this case, Joe.

Have you fully read Collyer's opinion from 4/30/12? In that opinion the role of the conservator is better explained as it takes the place of the BOD, shareholders and management "it steps into the shoes", as explained by the Judge.

I do not share your opinion that plaintiff has made a good case.