Replies to post #146741 on Mr Cooper Group Inc (COOP)

[old_schooler]

Blunder?? IMO, Requesting more discovery when you already have enough evidence in addition to a full Senate inquiry contemporaneously calling for the same documents is redundant and not needed. WMI lawyers are only following protocol by requesting extended discovery. The Judge knows this and is precluding unnecessary busy work.

Rather than a blunder I see it as victory for WMI. It is an efficient way to let the parties settle amongst themselves.
Think of a cage fight where one contestant is out cold while the other wails away on him. The ref will stop the carnage because the battle is over.

I think what the Judge (ref) is saying is: at this point in the game, more discovery will not accomplish anything except to cost the estate more money.

(edit) As you may recall, the Judge left the door open if it was deemed necessary.

[dianebRN]

I don't know why u say the denial of the 2004 discovery was a huge blunder. Perhaps the judge was trying to keep the playing field level in terms of promoting health discussion of settlement. JMO always.