Here are a couple of articles, sorry can't give the specific addresses.

Reuters, Aug 5, article by Alison Frankel, "NY AG's BOA filing...."

Rolling Stone, Matt Taibbi, August 24, "Obama goes all out for dirty banker deal"

Frack.  So Buffett bought BOA so Obama would not be forced to.  I knew I should not have let yesterday's tweets about the possibility of nationalizing BOA get me all atwitter. It would have been a good thing to do but imagine how GOPers would have spun it next year. It would have made Buffet's fundraiser for Obama next month almost completely pointless.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/25/news/economy/buffett_obama_fundraiser/

It will probably bring in some big bucks.  Wall $treet owes Obama big time for this one.

Strange things are afoot at the BofA. Interesting move.

Any way it goes ... the venerable institution, DQ, is likely to see an uptick with all the positive free press it's they've been getting of late! :-)

contributions from people like me instead of the Wall St. types he is romancing with the global settlement on mortgages.

You weren't kidding when you said "fantasy", were you.

Did I ever tell you about my plans for Angelina Jolie and me....?

Okay, this is how I see it.

All the big guys were sitting in the Oval Office with THE big guy and somebody spoke up:

We need a buffer between us and the banks.

So Biden piped up:

Okay, I will get him on the phone right now!

And that was that!

You see Joe had not recently replenished his hearing aid.

I am no conspiracy theorist! This came to me directly in a dream.

In the meeting with Obamer, Buffer wanted to clear up some things about a wind down by FSOCK in the slim chance that the legislation in New York would force BOA's hand. After all, nothing has ever been wound down by FSOCK, how does it work. Sec. Treas holds the cards.

Depending on the dissolution philosophy, would the bad debt all be loaded into one entity, or two, where a government/private cum Federal Reserve mish mash could deal with it?

Or would the Sec. Treas. say, hell, just put it into bankruptcy.

So, that covers Obamer, Bueffer, and the blinking swallower of words, Geithner. Just don't know what happens to Marther Vineyerd in this scenario.

I suspect that the biggest factor at work here was that Buffett could get himself high income preferred stock and a cheap option on 7% of the entire company -- a no lose proposition even if the market is correct and BofA's assets aren't worth as much as management says.  Moynihan and his team saw this as a way to save their jobs and somehow, at least yesterday, BofA's other shareholders didn't quite realize the extent to which Moynihan and co. let the Oracle dilute them.

For the record I'd like to define some of the Court actions.

In 2010 a group of investors in 3 MBS's stemming from Countrywide sent the Trustee, BNYM a letter demanding they sue Countrywide (BOA) to take back mortgages. Stonewalled by BNYM, the group, under the title, Walnut Place, LLC, filed an action in Feb '11 with the Supreme Court, NYS.This action was assigned to Judge Kapnick.

In the meantime BNYM reached a settlement with 22 investors in 530 MBS's, in secret and without informing Walnut Place, and filed it with the Court. NYBM specifically asked that Judge Kapnick to be assigned, for the reason that "...if approved, the Settlement (with BOA/Countrywide) will resolve the claims raised by the plaintiffs in Walnut Place, LLC"

As a separate action, on Aug 5 Schneiderman filed his motion to intervene. That motion included counterclaims against BNYM :

1. Breach of Fiduciary duty in negotiating the $8.5 B settlement.

2. Violation of Executive Law

3. Violation of General Business Law(under the Martin Act)

Schneiderman's motion also says the AG has potential claims against Countrywide and BNYM.

And in what looks like a separate action, around Aug 5, Walnut Place, LLC filed a motion to intervene in the BNYM Settlement.

Separately, Schneiderman was kicked off the global settlement(not the same as the BOA/BNYM $8.5B deal) being engineered by the 50 Attorney's general, etc. As long as New York is a hold out on the global settlement of 50 other states, Trustees signing on to that agreement would still have to face actions by New York State, and thus are less inclined to act now.

Breaking news on BofA $8.5B settlement:

The entity known as Walnut Place, LLC has just filed to move the venue of the $8.5 B settlement from New York State to the U.S. District Court in Manhatten.

The filing claims that the size of the case qualifies as a "mass" action, giving federal courts jurisdiction.

BofA wisely chose Article 77 in order to provide a mechanism to make the Settlement binding upon all 530 trusts. Class action in Federal Court would allow parties to opt out of the settlement.

BofA counsel calls it a delaying tactic.

Apparently there is not Article 77 precedent for cases of the magnitude of the BofA Settlement.

In the very least, the filing today may throw a monkey wrench into Judge Kapnick's schedule of an August 30 deadline for additional bond holders to intervene in the Settlement. In other words, opposing bond holders may have more time to get organized to file motions. Apparently the Settlement was done without contact with other than the 22 largest parties, and those opposed have been slow to act because their expectations for put backs were low.