If she adopted the arguments made by WMI then she could have ruled de novo and allowed for the dissolution of the EC - neither of which occurred here, thank God.
She may have let the FDIC off the hook in adjourning the hearing on their motion to modify the stay until tomorrow, but remember the circumstances under which their motion was filed - they threatened the judge at the SJ hearing by stating they would just "take back" the deposits. I believe the judge wanted to address this issue fair and square - giving them no opportunity to claim that the FDIC wasn't afforded due process and giving them no grounds for an appeal. I would much rather know that her decision is guarded behind an appeal-proof wall than to have a quick judgment rendered and overturned on appeal. She is acting in the interests of justice and the law - and I can't argue with that.
IMO, the FDIC never expected to argue this appeal because the parties were likely expecting to settle this - without the EC - beforehand. Now that the EC has been formed, the FDIC will have to face it's own music as its motion will almost certainly be denied. If she denies it from the bench - as I strongly believe she will - it will send a strong message to the parties urging them to move their talks along quickly, because SJ will soon follow.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
