"Then, in your analysis, no plaintiffs are likely to see any monetary damages from the alleged overpayment of quarterly distributions to UST above the amounts advanced as so-called bailout funds? More simply stated, the $50 B paid above the $179 B bailout goes only to the GSEs, not shareholders? "
This is correct. The overpayment would go back to the GSEs...not directly to the plaintiffs who had no expectation of personal ownership of those overpayments.
"Then why are so many suits in progress that seek return of income to shareholders or reinstatement of dividends denied under allegedly illegal circumstances? Is everyone else crazy for spending huge legal fees chasing some unattainable goal?"
Well...there are a lot of reasons really. One is that the lawyers are trying to keep the cases alive while trying to overcome HERA and wait for more unreleased documents. Another reason is that although payment of dividends may be a lost cause, the rest of the lawsuit is still valid, and it would be negligence for a lawyer not to claim every cause of action possible when suing as long as there is at least a semblance of possible remedy. A third reason is that if you dont claim it at the beginning, its hard if not impossible to claim it later...so better to claim a possible lost cause now than risk being barred from claiming a legitimate claim later. Also, it doesnt cost more to add an additional claim.
"Sounds like grounds for dismissal of most every suit filed because the remedy sought would not be allowed by the court. Right?"
Possibly a partial dismissal...but as I explained above, the rest of the claims would move forward. And even for a partial dismissal, that is up to the court...they can refuse to dismiss and assign the overpayments to the GSEs in a personal action. Its called a 3rd party beneficiary to an action.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
