Replies to post #310719 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Dollars1]

YW! 955

[Donotunderstand]

should be interesting to see what court says

this is it - the nutshell


Because Perry Capital is not yet “entitled” to access the materials under the protective order issued by the Court of Federal Claims, Fairholme has not provided Perry Capital with those materials.

Thus, only the parties to this appeal that are also parties to the Court of Federal Claims action— including the government — currently have access to Fairholme’s motion and the attached materials.

It is extremely rare and unusual for a single party to a litigation to be barred from viewing documents filed in its case. Cf. Abourezk v. Reagan, 785 F.2d 1043, 1060-61 (D.C. Cir. 1986) (explaining the limited circumstances under which courts may “dispose of the merits of a case on the basis of ex parte, in camera submissions”), aff’d, 484 U.S. 1 (1987); U.S. ex rel. Boisjoly v. Morton Thiokol, Inc., CIV. A. No. 87-0209, 1987 WL 10232, at *4 (D.D.C. Apr. 15, 1987) (lifting seal on documents to allow a litigating party access to documents).

Not only is Perry Capital barred from reviewing the motion filed under seal and the attached documents, but Perry Capital also will likely be unable to review the government’s response to that motion or any further briefing containing sealed materials.

In addition, it is significant that this Court has suspended the merits briefing schedule pending resolution of the motion for judicial notice, demonstrating that the document issue is affecting Perry Capital’s rights in this appeal.