WILLIAMS v. FANNIE MAE — Entry #33: MOTION for Summary Judgment by FANNIE MAE, RICHARD LAWCH, GRACE HUERSCHER
Case: WILLIAMS v. FANNIE MAE dcd · 1:05-cv-01483
filed July 28, 2005
What this document is
Docket entry #33 · filed June 21, 2007
MOTION for Summary Judgment by FANNIE MAE, RICHARD LAWCH, GRACE HUERSCHER (Attachments: # (1) Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment# (2) Exhibit Exhibit A - Declaration of Grace Huebscher and Deposition Excerpts# (3) Exhibit Exhibit B - 3-28-2007 Williams Dep and Exhibit# (4) Exhibit Exhibit C - Fannie Mae's Interrogatory Responses# (5) Exhibit Exhibit D - Declaration of Richard Lawch# (6) Exhibit Exhibit E - 3-21-2003 Williams Deposition Excerpts# (7) Exhibit Exhibit F - 5-7-2007 Williams Deposition and Exhibit# (8) Exhibit Exhibit G - DC Certificate# (9) Exhibit Exhibit H - Jones Deposition and Exhibits# (10) Exhibit Exhibit I - CAM Amended Complaint# (11) Exhibit Exhibit J - CAM Dismissal Order# (12) Exhibit Exhibit K - Williams Interrogatory Responses# (13) Exhibit Exhibit L - 3-17-2003 Williams Deposition# (14) Exhibit Exhibit M - DC License Document# (15) Exhibit Exhibit N - Draft Complaint# (16) Exhibit Exhibit O - 5-5-2003 Williams Deposition Excerpts# (17) Exhibit Exhibit P - 5-6-2003 Williams Deposition Excerpts# (18) Exhibit Exhibit Q - Westover Declaration# (19) Exhibit Exhibit R - Production Document# (20) Exhibit Exhibit S - Ott Deposition Excerpts# (21) Exhibit Exhibit T - Production Document# (22) Affidavit Declaration of K Grundeman# (23) Statement of Facts Statement of Undisputed Facts# (24) Text of Proposed Order # (25) Certificate of Service)(Goldfrank, Sarah)
Who is involved
- FANNIE MAE
- WILLIAMS
Why we have it
We follow this case because it names a company we track, although that company is not a party:
- Marathon Digital: its subsidiary “Sullivan Company” appears in a filing in this case.
…recruited away by another firm known as John 19 F. Sullivan Company in Philadelphia, 20 Pennsylvania. 21 Q.…
A free copy from the RECAP archive of federal court filings (mirrored at the Internet Archive), retrieved November 07, 2026. Federal court filings are public records.
Document text
2 page(s), 1,814 characters, read from page images by OCR, so expect some character errors · plain text.
Full text
Case 1:05-cv-01483-JDB Document 33-20 Filed 06/21/2007 Page 1 of2
EXHIBIT R
. . . mt te -
PV eee eT.
Case 1:05-cv-01483-JD6 Document 33-20 Filed 06/21/2007 Page 2 ote
_ ‘Subject: Presentation on August 21 on
~-: Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 12:49:18 -0400 -
ee, ~ From: "mail.risk-mitigation.com” <marialice@risk-mitigation.com>
“2°. Tos "Rhoda E Newman” <rhoda
_<grace_huebscher@fanniemae.com>. .. ~
_€ newman@fanniemae.com>; - .
+ CC: <bhartsfield@risk-mitigationcom> >.
> We are tooking forward to mieeting with you of the Zistof August. However, we want to make certain thal Kate is on.
's,,*| target with her presentation. Could you please let us know if you are looking at the captive as 2 potential credit
/ *, ‘enhancement tool for Fannie Mae or as a tool that the DUS lenders could use, ee oo
{mat with LendLease’ Chief Crédit Officer and tha CFO in Dallas tast week.. There appears to be interest on their
part in using a captive insurance company as a risk transfer and credit enhancement vehicle but they were —
- concerned about Fannie Mae's reaction to the concept of captive insurance companies. . Also, it appeared to
_: LendLease.that the captive could be-very-effective if they coutd also lay off their 5% first loss obligation under the -
;_-DUS program to the captive insurance company. ‘This question was raised in my e-mail to you back on May 30,
-” Finally, could we spand a little time discisssing the other two questions from the insurance companies that we posed
to you at the end of May?
“> My partner, Harvey Hartsfield will be working with Kate on her presentation so please cc him on your response,
' Thanks. Marialice ...
weal Boats et ay
met hh ne de
verot sisal) UP ner Ure
ohn ot May 29
Fe WUD cate
. WK resporge
10522 — s/6103 12:00PM
FNMA.MBW.008057
CONFIDENTIAL