Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
7Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Jpmc and Wamu Mtd Mpsj

Jpmc and Wamu Mtd Mpsj

Ratings: (0)|Views: 245|Likes:
Published by Mike Maunu
JPMorgan Chase admits they are not the successor-in-interest to WAMU, the FDIC is. Pg. 33 Line 5. DEUTSCHE as trustee for the Trusts listed in Exhibits 1-A and 1-B, v FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION, as receiver for Washington Mutual Bank; JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, National Association; and WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORPORATION, District of Columbia Case No. 1:09-cv-1656 (RMC)
JPMorgan Chase admits they are not the successor-in-interest to WAMU, the FDIC is. Pg. 33 Line 5. DEUTSCHE as trustee for the Trusts listed in Exhibits 1-A and 1-B, v FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION, as receiver for Washington Mutual Bank; JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, National Association; and WASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORPORATION, District of Columbia Case No. 1:09-cv-1656 (RMC)

More info:

Published by: Mike Maunu on Apr 02, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/17/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIADEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUSTCOMPANY, as Trustee for the Trusts listedin Exhibits 1-A and 1-B,Plaintiff,v.FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCECORPORATION, as receiver forWashington Mutual Bank; JPMORGANCHASE BANK, National Association; andWASHINGTON MUTUAL MORTGAGESECURITIES CORPORATION,Defendants.Case No. 1:09-cv-1656 (RMC)
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORTOF JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. AND WASHINGTON MUTUALMORTGAGE SECURITIES CORPORATION’S MOTION TO DISMISSAND MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Robert A. Sacks (admitted
pro hac vice
)Stacey R. Friedman (admitted
pro hac vice
)SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP125 Broad StreetNew York, New York 10004Telephone: (212) 558-4000Facsimile: (212) 558-3588Brent J. McIntosh (D.C. Bar No. 991470)Henry C. Quillen (D.C. Bar No. 986686)SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP1701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.Washington, D.C. 20006Telephone: (202) 956-7500Facsimile: (202) 293-6330
Counsel for DefendantsJPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and Washington Mutual MortgageSecurities Corporation
 November 22, 2010
Case 1:09-cv-01656-RMC Document 55-1 Filed 11/22/10 Page 1 of 39
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ............................................................................................. iii
 
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT .........................................................................................1
 
BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................4
 
ARGUMENT .......................................................................................................................8
 
I.
 
DEUTSCHE BANK’S BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIMS FAIL TOSTATE A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED. ......................8
 
A.
 
Deutsche Bank’s Notice and Repurchase Claims Must BeDismissed. ..................................................................................................11
 
1.
 
Notice and Repurchase Claims Require Loan-By-LoanAssessment, Materiality and Adversity. ........................................11
 
2.
 
Deutsche Bank Does Not Identify a Single Loan-LevelContractual Provision That Has Actually Been Breached. ............13
 
3.
 
Deutsche Bank Does Not Identify a Single Breach of aRepresentation or Warranty That Had a Material andAdverse Effect on the Value of a Specified Loan..........................18
 
B.
 
The Trustee’s Sole Remedy for Breaches of Representations andWarranties Is Repurchase of the Mortgage Loans, So DeutscheBank’s Claims, Which Seek Only Damages, Must Be Dismissed. ...........22
 
C.
 
Deutsche Bank’s Allegations Regarding Its Access to LoanDocuments, Even If True, Do Not Support Its Claims. .............................23
 
D.
 
For Most of the Agreements on Which Deutsche Bank Relies, theStatute of Limitations Bars Its Claims. ......................................................25
 
II.
 
THE COURT SHOULD ENTER PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENTIN JPMC’S FAVOR FINDING THAT THE FDIC RETAINEDLIABILITY FOR DEUTSCHE BANK’S CLAIMS. ............................................26
 
A.
 
There Is No Bona Fide Dispute That the FDIC Retained AllMortgage Origination Liabilities Not Having a “Book Value” as of WMB’s Closing. ........................................................................................28
 
Case 1:09-cv-01656-RMC Document 55-1 Filed 11/22/10 Page 2 of 39
 
 - ii -B.
 
Summary Judgment Prior to Discovery Is Entirely AppropriateBecause If There Is Any Ambiguity About Which Party Assumedthe Deutsche Bank Liabilities, Then FDIC Either Retained ThoseLiabilities or Is Obligated to Indemnify JPMC for ThoseLiabilities. ..................................................................................................30
 
CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................33
 
Case 1:09-cv-01656-RMC Document 55-1 Filed 11/22/10 Page 3 of 39

Activity (7)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
djjazzyjeff added this note
Maunu, who in the late 1980s served nearly 2 1/2 years of a five-year sentence in a Texas penitentiary for securities fraud, today owns Dynamic ONE Worldwide Inc., a Las Vegas company that markets the Original Laundry Clean Ring, which sells for about $70. See this article about him here: http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/1998/...
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
monbarrs liked this
bdaviesmd6605 liked this
monbarrs liked this
June Reyno liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->