The Fisher and Reid Plaintiffs filed their supplemental brief opposing the government’s omnibus motion to dismiss, and a copy of that filing is attached to this e-mail message.  These shareholder-plaintiffs urge Chief Judge Swweney to preserve their derivative claims for takings without just compensation, illegal exaction, and breach of fiduciary duty.13-608-0047

Washington Federal filed its supplemental brief opposing the government’s omnibus motion to dismiss under seal becase it contains references to non-public discovery material.  We should see a redacted copy for public consumption in a couple of days or weeks.

Owl Creek filed its supplemental brief opposing the government’s omnibus motion to dismiss under seal because it contains references to non-public discovery material.  We should see a redacted copy for public consumption in a couple of days or weeks.

The Rafter Plaintiffs filed their supplemental brief opposing the government’s omnibus motion to dismiss, and a copy of that filing is attached to this e-mail message.  “The Government cannot
hide behind the Third Amendment to the PSPAs to evade the law,” the Rafter Plaintiffs tell Chief Judge Swweney, urging her to allow their contract claims to move forward. 14-740-0042

Fairholme filed its supplemental brief opposing the government’s omnibus motion to dismiss, and a copy of that filing is attached to this e-mail message.  Fairholme — indicating that Owl Creek, Appaloosa, Akanthos, CSS, and Mason Capital will have more to say about this — urge Judge Sweeney to The Cacciapalle Plaintiffs urge Chief Judge Sweeney to reject dismissing their implied-in-fact contract claims.13-465-0429

The Cacciapalle Plaintiffs filed their supplemental brief opposing the government’s omnibus motion to dismiss, and a copy of that filing is attached to this e-mail message.  The Cacciapalle Plaintiffs urge Chief Judge Sweeney to permit them to pursue their derivative claims, breach of contract claims, and claims arising from the breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.  13-466-0081-1

Arrowood filed its supplemental brief opposing the government’s omnibus motion to dismiss, and a copy of that filing is attached to this e-mail message.  Arrowood urges Chief Judge Sweeney to defer consideration of arguments about whether pre-Sweep and post-Sweep shareholders should be treated differently.  13-698-0050

Fairholme the Cacciapalle Plaintiffs, Messrs. Fisher and Reid, Arrowood, and the Rafter Plaintiffs delivered their joint omnibus response to the government’s omnibus motion to dismiss.  It goes without saying the litigating shareholders oppose the government’s request.  “This case concerns one of the largest Government appropriations of private property in the history of this Nation, more befitting of ‘a banana republic’ than ‘a constitutional one,” Fairholme and its allies tell Chief Judge Sweeney.   Fairholme tells Chief Judge Sweeney the government said the conservatorship would be temporary, and the purpose of the warrants was to was to preserve, rather than wipe out, shareholder value in the event of a recovery.  Instead, the government got greedy.  And these lawsuits seek to right that wrong.  Fairholme tells Chief Judge Sweeney she should deny the government’s motion to dismiss.  A copy of Fairholme & Friends’ filing is attached to this e-mail message. 13-465-0428