Thursday, March 5, 2015

Contract Claim Against FDIC Not Preempted by FIRREA, Ninth Circuit Rules

By Michael Fuller, The Underdog Lawyer ®

Yesterday, a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel ruled in favor of a bank on a breach of contract claim against the FDIC.


Click here to read yesterday's opinion in Bank of Manhattan v FDIC.

FDIC Breaches Contract

The bank claimed that the FDIC took receivership of a loan participation agreement, then breached the agreement by selling the loan interest without the bank's consent.

The FDIC argued the bank's breach of contract claim was entirely preempted by federal banking law (the FIRREA).

The district court rejected the FDIC's argument and held the FIRREA doesn't permit the FDIC to breach contracts without consequence.

In a 2-1 opinion, the Ninth Circuit panel affirmed the district court's ruling.

FIRREA Preemption

The panel distinguished a prior case where the Ninth Circuit had held that the FIRREA preempted a California statute regulating asset transfers.


The court reasoned that the prior case's holding was limited to preemption of statutory regulations, as opposed to contractual entitlements to compensation.

The opinion limited its preemption analysis in part because the text of the FIRREA "allows the FDIC to disaffirm or repudiate any contract it deems burdensome and pay only compensatory damages."

Judge Rawlinson wrote a dissent, arguing that there was no principled distinction between preemption analysis of state statute and of state common law.

7 comments:

  1. It’s in point of fact a great and helpful piece of info. I am happy that you simply shared this helpful information with us. Please stay us up to date like this. Thanks for sharing.public communications training

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey very nice blog!! Man .. Beautiful .. Amazing .. I'll bookmark your web site and take the feeds also…I'm happy to find a lot of useful info here in the post, we need develop more strategies in this regard, thanks for sharing. . . . . .top branding agency singapore

    ReplyDelete
  3. Spot on with this write-up, I really suppose this web site needs much more consideration. I’ll most likely be once more to read much more, thanks for that info. women health screening singapore

    ReplyDelete
  4. I believe this is among the such a lot significant information for me. And i am satisfied studying your article. However want to statement on few basic things, The site style is wonderful, the articles is actually nice : premium corporate gifts singapore

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm really inspired with your writing abilities and also with the layout on your blog. Is this a paid topic or did you modify it your self? Anyway keep up the excellent high quality writing, it’s rare to peer a great blog like this one these days..diamond ring

    ReplyDelete
  6. nice content, pls visit mine :)
    [http://www.bpti.uhamka.ac.id](http://www.bpti.uhamka.ac.id/)[https://journal.uhamka.ac.id/index.php/rektek/index](https://journal.uhamka.ac.id/index.php/rektek/index)

    ReplyDelete