Fannie Mae 2008 Annual Report Download - page 408

transfer order transferring this case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and
allowing the plaintiff until March 9, 2009 to file an opposition to the transfer. On January 8, 2009, Gwyer
filed a joint motion with Mary P. Moore to, among other things, consolidate this action with Moore v. Fannie
Mae, et al. and for the appointment on an interim basis of co-lead counsel. The defendants filed a response on
January 27, 2009 arguing that their motion was premature. On February 9, 2009, the U.S. District Court for
the District of Columbia entered an order extending the time for defendants to respond to Mr. Gwyer’s
complaint until April 14, 2009.
Weber v. Mudd, et al.
On December 3, 2008, Kristen Weber filed a proposed class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York against certain current and former Fannie Mae officers and directors. This case
is based on ERISA. Plaintiff alleges that the defendants, as fiduciaries of Fannie Mae’s ESOP, breached their
duties to ESOP participants and beneficiaries with regards to the ESOP’s investment in Fannie Mae common
stock when it was no longer prudent to continue to do so. Plaintiff purports to represent a class of participants
and beneficiaries of the ESOP whose accounts invested in Fannie Mae common stock beginning November 9,
2007. The complaint alleges that the defendants breached purported fiduciary duties with respect to the ESOP.
The plaintiff seeks unspecified damages, attorneys’ fees, and other fees and costs and injunctive and other
equitable relief. On December 9, 2008, plaintiff voluntarily dismissed this action.
Antitrust Lawsuits
In re G-Fees Antitrust Litigation
Since January 18, 2005, we have been served with 11 proposed class action complaints filed by single-family
borrowers that allege that we and Freddie Mac violated federal and state antitrust and consumer protection
statutes by agreeing to artificially fix, raise, maintain or stabilize the price of our and Freddie Mac’s guaranty
fees. The actions were consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Plaintiffs filed a
consolidated amended complaint on August 5, 2005. Plaintiffs in the consolidated action seek to represent a
class of consumers whose loans allegedly “contain a guarantee fee set by” us or Freddie Mac between
January 1, 2001 and the present. The plaintiffs seek unspecified damages, treble damages, punitive damages,
and declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as attorneys’ fees and costs.
We and Freddie Mac filed a motion to dismiss on October 11, 2005. On October 29, 2008, the court denied
our motion to dismiss in part and granted it in part. On November 13, 2008, FHFA as conservator for both us
and Freddie Mac, filed a motion to intervene and stay the case. On that day the Court entered an order
granting FHFA’s motion to intervene and stayed the case until April 1, 2009.
Escrow Litigation
Casa Orlando Apartments, Ltd., et al. v. Federal National Mortgage Association (formerly known as Medlock
Southwest Management Corp., et al. v. Federal National Mortgage Association)
A complaint was filed against us in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Texarkana
Division) on June 2, 2004, in which plaintiffs purport to represent a class of multifamily borrowers whose
mortgages are insured under Sections 221(d)(3), 236 and other sections of the National Housing Act and are
held or serviced by us. The complaint identified as a proposed class low- and moderate-income apartment
building developers who maintained uninvested escrow accounts with us or our servicer. Plaintiffs Casa
Orlando Apartments, Ltd., Jasper Housing Development Company and the Porkolab Family Trust No. 1 allege
that we violated fiduciary obligations that they contend we owed to borrowers with respect to certain escrow
accounts and that we were unjustly enriched. In particular, plaintiffs contend that, starting in 1969, we misused
F-130
FANNIE MAE
(In conservatorship)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)