APPEAL FROM THE JUDGMENT OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF MARIN

Hon. Lynn Duryee, Judge

APPELLANT'S OPENING BRIEF

<excerpt>
This evidence cannot be lightly dismissed since Jeffrey Thorne is a highly credible expert witness who swears under penalty of perjury that he actually read the real PAA and it does not absolve Chase of liability for WaMu. More specifically, Mr. Thorne's declaration reads, in pertinent part, as follows:

1. Currently I am employed as an asset manager for the FDIC through a contractor for the FDIC, RSM McGladrey Inc. I am intimately familiar with the procedures for taking over a failed bank and the required notices that must be given to insulate the buying bank from liability for the original loans of the failed banks.

2. When Washington Mutual failed, I was involved in the takeover of Washington Mutual by FDIC and the escrow that was opened to sell Washington Mutual to Chase Bank. I was uniquely positioned to be involved in what was known as "Bank No. 26 takeover" as I had previously worked for Washington Mutual, heading their Construction Lending Department for 38 states.

4. Within the takeover procedures by the FDIC, the FDIC will enter into an agreement with the succeeding bank. In this instance the FDIC entered into an agreement with Chase Bank. But because of the nature of the transaction, the FDIC guaranteed 80% of the loans,

while Chase only assumed 20% of the potential losses on the loans. Pursuant to the public part of the agreement with the FDIC, of which were approximately 39 pages, the balance of the contract and the complete agreement with the FDIC and Chase bank is 118 pages long which has not been made public. I am familiar with this agreement, I have read it, I was involved in the takeover of WAMU with the FDIC, and the balance of the agreement imposes liability on Chase for ongoing contracts with WAMU. Chase took liability for the ongoing contracts in return for getting an 80% discount on the loan's principal owed. Essentially, Chase Bank traded their right to cut off all liability on WaMu's end for money and a good deal.

5. Chase assumed the rights and benefits owing to WAMU under its outstanding contracts with its customers. Because of the favorable guarantee from the FDIC, they also agreed to assume the liabilities flowing from the WAMU contracts.

6. From 2002 to 2006, I was senior loan consultant [or WAMU].

Mr. Thorne's testimony is further bolstered by the FDIC's tacit admission that the document exists, i.e., when Petitioner's counsel sought the "smoking gun" document by subpoena, the FDIC's agent told Petitioner's counsel that the document could only be obtained after all parties and the trial judge executed a comprehensive stipulated confidentiality agreement and protective order barring dissemination outside of this case. That response indicates something is being hidden.