Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 28 APRIL 2026

Oral Arguments Heard In Fannie Mae Shareholders Class Action

Boies Schiller Flexner LLP
Boies Schiller Flexner LLP
Contributor
Boies Schiller Flexner LLP

Boies Schiller Flexner LLP

Boies Schiller Flexner is a firm of internationally recognized trial lawyers, crisis managers, and...

View firm profile
Explore more from Boies Schiller Flexner LLP

Boies Schiller Flexner defended an $812 million judgment before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in a landmark case involving Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac shareholders challenging the Net Worth Sweep. The firm argued that the government's decision to divert all profits to Treasury was unprecedented, arbitrary, and breached shareholders' reasonable expectations and the implied covenant of good faith.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Boies Schiller Flexner argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in defense of an $812 million judgement the firm secured against the Federal Housing Finance Agency, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac on behalf of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac shareholders.

BSF argued that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Collins v. Yellen only confirmed FHFA’s authority to adopt the Net Worth Sweep, not whether it breached shareholders’ rights. BSF contended the Sweep — diverting all profits to treasury — was unprecedented, unsupported by analysis, and unjustified by the stated risk of “circular draws.” Instead, the record showed treasury acted to prevent Fannie and Freddie from retaining profits and rebuilding capital. BSF argued this arbitrarily defeated reasonable shareholder expectations, breached the implied covenant of good faith, and gave current shareholders standing because it permanently stripped them of profit rights.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from