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

Susman Godfrey May Billing:
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229110621000000000012.pdf

Interesting to note: Aurelius was indeed not among the settling NHs, and was the target for a motion to compel all month. Also, there was interest re. claims against directors & officers, queries re. "gifting issues", and WMI/EC signed a "common interest agreement" on 25 May.

Quote:
-----------------------------------------------------
2 MAY ARD Meeting with client and B. Scheller re. possible settlement. Corresponding with experts re. expert reports. Corresponding with experts re. extent of available NOLs. 4.4 hrs

3 MAY SARGENT Preparing for deposition of Aurelius 12.6 hrs

3 MAY ARD Corresponding with experts re. valuation scenarios for WMMRC. Preparing for Aurelius deposition. 8.9 hrs

4 MAY SARGENT Preparing for and attending deposition of Aurelius. 12.0 hrs

4 MAY ARD Preparing for and attending deposition of Aurelius. 10.2 hrs

5 MAY SARGENT Conferring with trial team members re. settlement offer 1.0 hrs

6 MAY SARGENT Drafting motion to compel Aurelius to produce additional documents. 4.5 hrs

6 MAY SARGENT Conferring by phone with EC and counsel re. settlement and additional discovery. 1.5 hrs

6 MAY ARD Discussing various tax structures for proposed settlement with experts and committee. Researching insider trading law in connection with draft motion to Aurelius to compel production of documents.

9 MAY SARGENT Revising motion to compel Aurelius to produce documents. 5.8 hrs

10 MAY ARD Preparing for Appalloosa and Centerbridge depositions.

17 MAY SARGENT Conferring in office with ARD and WILLINGHAM re. settlement negotiations and discovery issues 2.1 hrs

17 MAY ARD Reviewing tax objections, change of ownership concerns and tax scenarios raised by equity holders in preparation for meeting with K ANDERSON from BDO 2.2 hrs

18 MAY SUSMAN Attending meeting of debtor and creditors at WGM. Conferring in office with SARGENT. Reviewing file. 4.0 hrs

18 MAY ARD Researching law on cram down and gifting in preparation for settlement meeting.

19 MAY ARD Responding to committee queries re litigation prospects outside settlement. 1.2 hrs

22 MAY SARGENT Conferring by phone and email with counsel for Centerbridge, Owl Creek, and Appaloosa re. settlement negotiations. 2.5 hrs

22 MAY ARD Researching gifting issues in context of current settlement and exhanging emails with equity committee counsel re. same. 3.1 hrs

25 MAY SARGENT Conferring with ARD re claims against Directors and Officers and insurance and researching factual and legal matters re. same. 4.5 hrs

25 MAY ARD Preparing for and attending meeting with debtors. creditors counsel and lawyers involved in directors and officers litigation. 3.9 hrs

25 MAY ARD Reviewing and signing common interest agreement with debtors. 0.5 hrs

31 MAY SARGENT Reviewing new term sheets provided by Settling Noteholders 2.0 hrs

31 MAY SARGENT Attending meeting at Weil Gotshal re. claims against directors and officers and structure of reorganized debtor.
-----------------------------------------------------

Reviewing and signing common interest agreement with debtors.
End quotes.
An explanation of a common interest agreement:

I. Introduction

In most circumstances, the disclosure of privileged information by a party or a party’s counsel to a third person destroys the attorney-client privilege. However, there is a narrow but important exception to this rule. Under certain circumstances, if a party or counsel discloses privileged information to an actual or potential co-party or their counsel in the course of representation, the attorney-client privilege is not waived. This exception to waiver is known as the common interest or joint defense privilege. This privilege “softens the ordinary requirement that lawyer-client communications must be made in confidence in order to be protected by the privilege.”2 If the parties claiming the privilege produce evidence that the parties were pursuing a common interest in the litigation and had agreed to do so, the parties may claim a privilege for the duration of the common interest

Que tranquilito está todo... ayer casi no hubo volumen en preferentes. En comunes hubo un trade a 3 segundos del final que tumbo un 6% el precio como suelen hacer esos automatas que bien conoce Maximunae.

Me marcho a las fiestas de Alicante a disfrutar unos dias. A ver si a la vuelta se han hecho de una vez las dichosas depositions.

Mucha suerte a todos

http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229110622000000000004.pdf

News: HF's squaring off - 06/22 Hedge Funds Square Off Over WAMU
by Paula Schaap , Editor
Published:June 22, 2011

Hedge fund firms are squaring off over a settlement stemming from the Washington Mutual (WAMU) bankruptcy, the largest bank failure in U.S. history.

A group of hedge funds are claiming that another group of hedge fund firms including Owl Creek Asset Management, Appaloosa Management, Centerbridge Partners and Aurelius Capital Management used inside information they obtained during bankruptcy settlement discussion to trade in WAMU debt.

The four hedge fund firms were the main drivers of the latest settlement agreement for WAMU.

Shareholders had dropped their objections to the settlement in return for a stake in a restructured company.

More than $7 billion will be available for distribution to various creditor groups when WAMU comes out of bankruptcy, according to the settlement agreement.

If the settlement is approved, WAMU might exit bankruptcy this year. The bank filed for bankruptcy protection after it was seized by regulators in September 2008.

The hedge fund firms objecting to the WAMU settlement are trying to stave off the settlement until they get more documents from their adversaries.

Aurelius pulled no punches in a court filing Tuesday in response to the hedge funds’ motion.

“The shakedown continues, and the piling on begins,” Aurelius’ filing said.

Aurelius said that the hedge fund firms looking for documents from the four firms guiding the settlement were trying “to extract a heft ransom from creditors.”

http://www.hedgefund.net/publicnews/defa...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/22/washingtonmutual-hedgefund-idUSN1E75L1U620110622?feedType=RSS&feedName=marketsNews&rpc=43

WaMu ally u-turns, now opposes bankruptcy plan

Former WaMu ally Aurelius opposes latest plan

* Aurelius: JPMorgan needs to provide more to settlement

By Tom Hals

WILMINGTON, Del., June 22 (Reuters) - A hedge fund that helped craft a settlement at the heart of Washington Mutual Inc's (WAMUQ.PK) reorganization plan now opposes the deal, saying it unfairly enriches JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N), which bought the thrift's banking operations.

In a court filing on Wednesday, Aurelius Capital Management LP said the delay in implementing the deal has drained money from creditors, and that JPMorgan should contribute more to the settlement.

Aurelius and three other hedge funds helped strike a "global settlement" last year that ended legal battles between Washington Mutual, JPMorgan and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

In return for ending lawsuits, the parties agreed to divide about $10 billion of disputed assets. Washington Mutual ended up with about $7 billion, which it plans to distribute to creditors once it gets court approval to do so.

One of the disputed assets was $4 billion that Washington Mutual had on deposit at its former bank. That bank was seized and sold by the FDIC to JPMorgan in the biggest bank failure in U.S. history in September 2008. The next day Washington Mutual filed for bankruptcy.

JPMorgan is paying an annual 0.2 percent interest to Washington Mutual on that $4 billion deposit. Aurelius argued in court papers that JPMorgan could have earned more than $400 million on those deposits since the start of the bankruptcy, while paying a total of only $20 million in interest.

Aurelius said it supported the global settlement when it expected the company's reorganization to become effective a year ago. But a series of setbacks mean the company is still in bankruptcy, and JPMorgan continues to benefit from the deposit.

"At this time, the Amended Global Settlement Agreement should not be approved as fair unless (JPMorgan) provides additional value to the debtors to compensate for the substantial delays," Aurelius said in a filing with Delaware's bankruptcy court.

"Washington Mutual is a little bit surprised by the filing, specifically with Aurelius's position with respect to the global settlement agreement, especially in light of the court's approval of the global settlement agreement," said Washington Mutual attorney Brian Rosen of the Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP law firm.

He added that Judge Mary Walrath has said she will not relitigate the settlement agreement. She described the settlement as fair in a Jan. 7 opinion in which she rejected the company's previous reorganization plan and requested modifications, such as changes to legal releases.

JPMorgan declined to comment.

Walrath will hold hearings in July on whether to approve Washington Mutual's plan of reorganization.

The case is In re Washington Mutual, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Delaware, No. 08-12229. (Reporting by Tom Hals, editing by Matthew Lewis)

Yo me troncho! Ahora empieza mi momento