FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN INSURANCE CORP., AS RECEIVER FOR SUNRISE SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
D & D GOLFVIEW PROPERTIES, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES; FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN INSURANCE CORP., AS RECEIVER FOR SUNRISE SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, V. FLORIDA NATIONAL BANK, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE; FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN INSURANCE CORP., AS RECEIVER FOR SUNRISE SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, V. BENGT BLOOM, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The FSLIC does not possess exclusive adjudicatory power over claims against insolvent savings and loan associations under its receivership, and courts retain jurisdiction.
FSLIC was appointed receiver for an insolvent savings and loan association and removed state court actions brought by the association to federal court…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Subject Matter Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
VANCE, Circuit Judge:
This action arose from the 1985 insolvency of Sunrise Savings & Loan Association, Inc. (“Old Sunrise”). The Federal Home Loan Bank Board appointed the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) as receiver for Old Sunrise and created Sunrise Federal to take over certain assets of Old Sunrise. Among the assets and liabilities transferred to Sunrise Federal were two state court actions brought by Old Sunrise against the Florida National Bank and Bengt Bloom. On September 12, 1986 Sunrise Federal was adjudged bankrupt and FSLIC was appointed as receiver. Shortly thereafter the state court substituted the FSLIC as the plaintiff in the Florida National Bank and Bloom actions. FSLIC removed the two cases to federal district court. FSLIC subsequently moved to dismiss the counterclaims of Florida National Bank and Bloom on the grounds that the district court had no subject matter jurisdiction. The district court denied FSLIC’s motion. The district court granted FSLIC’s motion for an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).
The FSLIC argues that the adjudication of receivership claims by the courts would unlawfully restrain the FSLIC’s powers and functions as receiver. See 12 U.S.C. §§ 1464(d)(6)(C), 1729.
This position recently has been squarely rejected by the Supreme Court in Coit Independence Joint Venture v. Federal Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp., — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 1361, 103 L.Ed.2d 602 (1989). (“The statutes governing FSLIC and the Bank Board do not grant FSLIC adjudicatory power over creditors’ claims against insolvent savings and loan associations under FSLIC receivership, nor do they divest the courts of jurisdiction to consider these claims de novo.”). Accordingly, the district court had subject matter jurisdiction over the suits.
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED and this case is REMANDED to the district court.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brenda D. Tillman under the Last Will and Testament of Kalen Oliver Tillman v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, 253 F.3d 1302 (11th Cir. 2001)
-
Women's Emergency Network v. Jeb Bush, 323 F.3d 937 (11th Cir. 2003)
-
Brenda D. Tillman under the Last Will and Testament of Kalen Oliver v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, 340 F.3d 1277 (11th Cir. 2003)
Authorities Cited
- Coit Independence Joint Venture v. Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp., 489 U.S. 561 (U.S. 1989)