The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
From: Woody Woodpeck <dothea...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 09:52:28 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Sat, Jul 4 2009 12:52 pm
Subject: Koispam, wamu wamu waaaaawaaaaaaaaaeaaaaaaaaaaaa
dumbass
On Jul 4, 11:20 am, koi <takamiyada...@gmail.com> wrote:
> By Christine Caulfield
> Law360, New York (July 02, 2009) -- Despite a bankruptcy judge's > order > greenlighting the request, Washington Mutual Inc.'s bid to get its > hands on JPMorgan Chase & Co. records for evidence of sabotage > continues, with WaMu now fighting the bank's request to have the > order > overturned. > WaMu fired off an objection to JPMorgan's motion for reconsideration > of the discovery order in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District > of Delaware on Wednesday, saying the bank's request amounted to a > “desperate effort to foreclose discovery concerning its own allegedly > tortious conduct.” > Judge Mary F. Walrath signed off on WaMu's motion to examine > JPMorgan's books on June 24; JPMorgan filed its reconsideration > motion > two days later, according to court documents. > WaMu told the court it wanted access to JPMorgan's books to find > evidence supporting allegations that it crafted a plot to undermine > the one-time savings and loan giant prior to its 2008 collapse in > order to buy up its banking assets cheaply. > WaMu said in its filing this week that it had advised JPMorgan on > June > 29 of its intent to limit the scope of its examination to documents > supporting business tort claims, but this compromise offer was > “rebuffed,” it said. > “JPMorgan insists on pressing ahead with their wasteful and meritless > motion for reconsideration of this court's order,” WaMu said. > “JPMorgan asks this court to throw out the baby with the bathwater, > when the debtors have already taken steps to drain the bath.” > WaMu's discovery request on May 1 sought production of documents and > depositions connected to potential business tort claims, potential > fraudulent transfer claims, potential turnover claims and potential > preferential transfer claims against JPMorgan. > JPMorgan objected to the request, stating that WaMu must seek the > information it wanted in already pending litigation. JPMorgan > contended in its objection filed May 13 that WaMu could not use Rule > 2004 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code to pursue discovery on issues that > were involved in two separate lawsuits. > WaMu filed an adversary proceeding in the Delaware bankruptcy court > on > April 27, seeking $4 billion in cash that was held in the deposit > accounts of subsidiary Washington Mutual Bank at the time WMB was > seized and sold by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to JPMorgan > for > $1.9 billion. > WaMu also sued the FDIC in the U.S. District Court for the District > of > Columbia, alleging that the purchase price was too low and that the > agency sold assets it had no right to seize. > JPMorgan, which intervened in that suit, also filed its own adversary > proceeding against WaMu, seeking declaratory judgments asserting that > it acquired the debtor in good faith and that it was the owner of the > $7.9 billion in disputed assets. > It was the last two suits that JPMorgan referred to as the operative > pending proceedings. > In granting WaMu's request over the bank's objections, Judge Walrath > said JPMorgan had misapplied the pending proceeding rule, since > WaMu's > motion did not seek evidence related to the bank's adversary > proceeding. > “Simply because JPMorgan chose to include background information > regarding the relationship of the parties involved in the JPMorgan > adversary action in its complaint does not mean that any Rule 2004 > examination request dealing with those background facts is related to > the JPM adversary action,” the judge said. > “The court concludes that the debtors' motion does not seek the > discovery of evidence related to the JPMorgan adversary action,” the > judge added. > Judge Walrath said JPMorgan's suit sought the court's declaration > that > it owned certain assets from the sale of WaMu, which occurred after > WaMu's closure, while WaMu sought to investigate conduct that > occurred > before the closure. > Further, the judge ruled, JPMorgan was not a party to WaMu's action > against the FDIC, and the mere possibility that it could be permitted > to intervene was insufficient to deny WaMu's motion. > WaMu asked to conduct a Rule 2004 investigation into JPMorgan after a > group of WaMu investors sued JPMorgan in the U.S. District Court for > the Southern District of Texas. WaMu wants to investigate whether the > allegations in the shareholder complaint are true, it said. > The investors allege that JPMorgan deliberately drove down the value > of WMB by abusing confidential information and that JPMorgan engaged > in sham negotiations with WaMu throughout 2008 about buying the > banking arm in order to obtain confidential information. > JPMorgan then shared that information with WaMu bank customers to > persuade them to withdraw their deposits, leaked information to the > media to depress the bank's stock value and ultimately used it in its > negotiations with the FDIC, allowing JPMorgan to acquire WaMu's bank > assets for a "fire sale" price, the investors claim. > WaMu filed for Chapter 11 protection on Sept. 26, citing > approximately > $33 billion in total assets and $8.2 billion in debts. > WaMu is represented by Elliott Greenleaf and Quinn Emanuel Urquhart > Oliver & Hedges LLP. > JPMorgan is represented by Landis Rath & Cobb LLP and Sullivan & > Cromwell LLP. > The case is In re: Washington Mutual Inc., case number 08-12229, in > the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. > --Additional reporting by Jacqueline Bell and Brendan Pierson
> On Jul 3, 9:53 pm, ron <rcabre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Everyone talked about a 10% to 15% pull back on the markets! Based on
> - Show quoted text - You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||