Treasury and FHFA filed their Motions to Dismiss Robinson v. FHFA yesterday, and copies of those two filings (Docs. 22 and 23) follow in two separate e-mail messages because they have large attachments.
You’ll notice that neither Treasury nor FHFA make any reference to any confidential discovery material Ms. Robinson obtained from Fairholme and filed under seal in support of her amended complaint. I don’t think Treasury and FHFA care about the content of any document or deposition testimony Fairholme has or will uncover. Those two agencies believe that everything they did was 100% correct, everything they will do is 100% correct, and are further convinced that no court should listen to any Fannie or Freddie shareholder’s complaints about anything.
At p. 7 of its Memorandum, FHFA says that if Treasury hadn’t stepped in, “the Enterprises would have been immediately forced into mandatory receivership and liquidation.” I think FHFA is suggesting that would have been a bad thing. But wouldn’t GSE shareholders be in a better position today if the GSEs had been placed in receivership and liquidated? If I recall correctly, Alvarez & Marsal concluded a couple of years ago that selling the GSEs’ assets for fair value and liquidating the entities would return value to the GSEs’ common shareholders. And I think A&M’s analysis holds true today as well, doesn’t it?15-00109-0023