Replies to post #351114 on Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[955]

Ignoring selected parts of HERA just because they're antithetical to Gov motives is NOT administration of justice, but rather outright TYRANNY. The court abrogated it's fiduciary duty to shareholders in FAILING MISERABLY to carry out the "preserve and conserve" mandates of HERA and the foundational tenets of conservatorship.

Pagliara's case was flawed. I predicted he would lose months ago for the exact reasons he did lose.

Simply put, he didnt challenge the conservatorship...he said that even under the conservatorship, he still had certain rights as shareholders.

This is, of course, wrong. Pagliara should have lost. The good news is that his case is meaningless in the overall war.

[big-yank]

Both of Pagliara's cases were designed to serve a different master. As legal steam appeared to be ebbing in the DC appeal and with Sweeney's never-ending Docugate delays, Pagliara brought suits to attempt to inject a fraud claim into the legal discourse. This claim, if driven forward by discovery of "what's in the books" could advance shareholders rights in a liquidation if the net worth runs out and FHFA pursues the"wind down" process.

At the time, I viewed his actions as more driven by fear of no progress and a desire to "cover his bets" than anything else.

I also keep reminding everyone that Delaware is one of the few jurisdictions with a Court of Chancery where stay orders are commonplace under common law principles of property rights. So at least in the action targeting Fannie Mae, his suit was not as undeserved to me than others seem to believe. There is a reason why a movement to remand is underway, now, in Delaware.

I bet that the Judge Cacheris decision could be one of those "silent but deadly" decisions that comes back to stink up subsequent plaintiff actions that remain pending.

JMHO.

[Dax1]

You predicted outcome of Paglari case. Please give us your prediction for Perry appeal.
Thanks