concluding that § 1823 [e], as Congress' response to holding in D'Oench, Duhme Co. represents broadening protection for FDIC founded on federal policies of protecting banking system
Summary of this case from OCI Mortgage Corp. v. MarcheseNo. 81-2109.
October 4, 1982, October TERM, 1982.
C.A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 670 F. 2d 934.
concluding that § 1823 [e], as Congress' response to holding in D'Oench, Duhme Co. represents broadening protection for FDIC founded on federal policies of protecting banking system
Summary of this case from OCI Mortgage Corp. v. Marcheseexplaining "purchase and assumption" transaction involving failed banks and creating special federal common law protections for FDIC when acquiring note through this method
Summary of this case from Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Whitlockapplying federal common law
Summary of this case from Fed. Deposit Ins. v. Blue Rock Shopping Ctr.detailing the procedures involved in a purchase and assumption transaction
Summary of this case from Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Gulf Life Ins Co.applying federal common law D'Oench Duhme doctrine alongside § 1823(e)
Summary of this case from F.D.I.C v. Gonzalez-Gorrondonapermitting award of punitive damages for claims of unfair competition and copyright infringement
Summary of this case from Morse/Diesel, Inc. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.Full title:DOHAISH v. TOOLEY
Court:U.S.
Date published: Oct 4, 1982
The FDIC, therefore, is a transferee of the assets and liabilities of the Bank under section 101(50) of the…
Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. WoodPurchase and assumption transactions have been described in more detail elsewhere. See Gunter v. Hutcheson,…