I won't claim to predict what a court ruling will be, just what fairness dictates the ruling should be. Plaintiffs are claiming they were illegally denied junior preferred dividends that FHFA alternatively gave to a new and more senior preferred shareholder. They claim that FHFA failed to exercise proper fiduciary responsibility to shareholders and that Amendment 3 was an illegal taking under the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment protection, and an example of illegal self-dealing.
Now a new element may be introduced in a newer litigation claiming that failure to pay dividends to all preferred dividend stockholders, but only to the government holding senior shares, may be a violation of Delaware state law. I find it preposterous that a court would rule in favor of plaintiff's complaints, but remand any improperly paid SPD to the very entity that was a key player in the illegal self-dealing arrangement by which the plaintiffs were harmed. That is rewarding bad behavior.
JMHO.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
