Replies to post #147567 on Mr Cooper Group Inc fka COOP

[Chiron]

What do you think about her delaying the SJ ruling until March.

[zukbro]

agreed. How the hell can anyone justify not getting on board at this point. It is clear the judge was ready to rule on the SJ in favor of us plus the dismissal of other claims...this should be a no brainer!

[DPincus]

And PQs are taking a hit, too. DP

[rramirez82]

Do I get brownie points for suggesting that doctrine as a potential method of imputing liability to WMI?

Don't forget I also said the bondholders wouldn't be able to meet the applicable legal standard because of the lack of self-dealing on WMI's part.

We all expected this end result and I agree - shares for $0.19 is just ridiculous given what we'll be at in a month or so.

Good luck to all.

[aladin61]

They're not getting mine.

[Bizreader]

Agreed. She has restated a strong theme in this case and the key grounds upon which so much of the litigation and charges are being leveled; corporate entities have rights unto themselves and are not to be over looked even when, as in this case, the bank holding company and the bank operated closely together. If there is any bottom line in this morass of opinion and emotion it is the fundamental legal rights of a corporate entity to be treated justly as any individual would be.

She may be thinking that by delaying the decision and giving the parties time to work out a settlement she is going to great lengths to protect the FDIC's ability to litigate future, similar issues by not creating such a clear and obvious ruling for the legal, public record.

I mean, though as obvious as it may seem to many, the FDIC has probably over reached in numerous cases lately to "protect" the depositors, and by allowing the parties in this BK case to settle without court rulings keeps the wolves at bay from the FDIC as it grinds through the banking industry restructuring which is clearly bloody business.

In the meantime, Congress is getting the laws in place to reflect the modern banking corporate structure so that bankers can't fleece depositors and run off to Tuscany or the Caymans through corporate shell games.

She may have decided to hold off because the biggest fish in this play is the FDIC in that even if JPM Chase were to go away, the FDIC would still be going to work trying to balance the good with the bad in the banking consolidation and clean up process. They could use the "break" they are getting to come to settlement, but if JPM Chase and WMI can't get it together and Judge Walrath does rule then the FDIC attorneys are going to have little legal ground to slow down the many claims against "set-off assets" that the OTS and they have seized. Once this ruling is made it will be used to support many more claims on the part of holding companies to get back seized assets.

IMHO EOM

WMI will get a settlement and it could come anytime!
Be in or be bummed!

[silicon valley au]

Mordi, what is your speculation on how this settles, i.e. all cash, stock swap, or cash and stock swap?

[DudeBug]

If Walrath stated she can't pierce the corporate veil, she just told us that the fdic is screwed trying to lump the federal savings bank deposit with the seized bank deposit in its argument, ....

With that corporate veil ruling that put the federal savings bank (WMfsb) deposits seperate from the WMB deposits, would that apply to ALL assets held by WMfsb? I need to look for those numbers but I believe I've seen where it's a significant amount. Anyone know?

Also, with that ruling and precedence set today, do you think we could see more claims dropping from the Omnibus agendas since they are very well going after the wrong party and probably know it?

These next 30 days could be awesome with claims being dismissed and favorable ruling for the SJ and possibly the tax returns.

[dianebRN]

Some people write really long posts. You said it all in a paragraph. "Unbelieveable that stock is only .19"