Washington Mutual demanda a la FDIC por 17 billones US$ + daños

Si, por eso cotizan a dia de hoy a escasamente 8 CENTIMOS. Comentarios como este son lamentables solo buscan atrapar a mas inversores que se los crean.

Aprende a leer Rosen las ha puesto con Warrants en el POR pero eso no vale absolutamente nada. Solo cuando el EC controle esta BK empezaremos a ver resultados.

Esta matizacion es la que te faltaba indicar despues del post. Yo se leer pero otros compran por los titulares.

Limited Objection of the Official Committee of Equity Security Holders to the Debtors' Motions for an Order, Pursuant to Section 105(a) of the Bankruptcy Code and Rule 9019 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (I) Approving Settlement Agreements in the California Securities Litigation, Flaherty Action and Securities Litigation and (II) Modifying the Automatic Stay Under Section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code to Allow Payment of Settlement Amount Under Directors and Officers Insurance Policies

http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229110819000000000003.pdf

"The proposed orders should make clear that the
D&O Carriers are not receiving a release for any other claims that may be covered by the D&O Policies.

WHEREFORE, the Equity Committee respectfully requests that any orders entered granting the Motions be revised to clearly state and limit the scope of the D&O Carriers’ discharge of liability as provided herein, and for such additional relief as the Court deems appropriate."

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_W/threadview?m=tm&bn=86316&tid=826249&mid=826249&tof=2&frt=2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pd_zI1FNIJ0

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_W/threadview?m=tm&bn=86316&tid=826567&mid=826567&tof=4&frt=2

It took me a while to catch up with the board readings, especially the recent legal filings, (and to get over the jet legs too), after a 3+ week trip to China. During past several weeks, the most important things happening to this case were, no doubt, the postponement of final oral arguments, and the filing/publication of EC written final arguments. The latter represents a significant milestone of achievement, following months of hard work, not just in proving insider trading misconducts, but also in uncovering a fraud BK process run by the debtor and their accomplices.

Since most have likely already read EC’s written arguments, and are familiar with its contents, I’ll not elaborate on them further. Instead, I’d like to share some thoughts on Susman team. After all, in addition to the Court, our fate is in their hands. I had communicated my thoughts with a well respected long via PM on ghost board during last July 4th, when at that time, the credibility of EC’s leader and legal counsel was in doubt (or under attack). This is what I wrote then:

“… regarding our attorneys. Since the early days of Susman joining the EC, I found I can understand them, and followed them closely ever since (if you check my posting history, you will notice how many posts I wrote about their billing statements, and comments about their performances/strategies. Of course, that doesn't mean I was right all the time. But it does show I have made great efforts trying to understand them and what they've been doing.)

I never want to compare EC counsel with TPS counsel. As I said before, each team has very different tasks at hand, one being more comprehensive, complex, and difficult, another much narrower in scope. So their approaches are understandably different. They are also different in style, as many observed. I tend to think TPS attorneys as "lawless", gun-slinging, trigger-happy western cowboys, while Susman more like Admiral Nimitz in Midway, collecting, analyzing information carefully, and strategizing methodically in order to achieve the maximum benefits under a complicated, adverse condition (Midway happened not long after Pearl Harbour disaster).”

If you followed Susman team closely, you can see they have a pattern of doing discovery first, then mapping out a detailed attacking plan based on discovery results. Unfortunately, they didn’t have a chance to do real hands-on discovery until the Court authorized insider trading investigations 6 months ago. Reading the final arguments, you can see how thorough, methodical Susman team has been in collecting, analyzing the evidence, including SNHs internal safeguard policies, and their month to month trading records, weaving, organizing, and presenting them in a detailed, coherent, and chronological order, followed by point-by-point legal arguments. The truth becomes self-evident: rules of insider trading were violated (both the letter of law and SNHs internal safeguards), and this BK process, controlled by the debtors and SNHs, was deviated into a game of favoritism, manipulations, and deceptions. There was not a thread evidence of fairness and equitableness. In short, the EC argument is a document of indictment of BK frauds.

In comparison to EC’s Dec. final argument, this current one is also more specific in demands/objectives, not only seeking to deny confirmation of POR because of its lack of good faith, but suggesting concrete remedies like equitable disallowance, FJR, and NewCo ownership. I also like the inclusion of Release issue, sending a warning shot to JPMC, FDIC, and WMI BOD. After all, my own initial goal in this case has been to defeat JPMC and FDIC.

(OT: I was asked by some one on the board about China’s economic conditions before my recent trip. Sadly to say, I don’t share the euphoria about the country. It’s a giant time bomb socially and economically. JMHO.)