green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
24.9 score
“in the instant case, in which removal and notice of appeal were timely, we will take the case as we find it on removal and treat everything that occurred in the state court as if it had taken place in the district court below.”
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1989
2007
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 36 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Nieto v. University of New Mexico
(5×)
also: Cited "see"
in the instant case, in which removal and notice of appeal were timely, we will take the case as we find it on removal and treat everything that occurred in the state court as if it had taken place in the district court below.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
WILLIAMS v. WALMART STORES EAST LP
Aurora Loan Servs., LLC v. Allen, 762 F. App’x 625 , 629 (11th Cir. 2019) (per curiam) (finding that post-judgment removal was improper after the time for appeal lapsed because “there was no state-court action pending at the time to remove”); cf. In re Savers, 872 F.2d at 966 (suggesting that if the time for appeal “had lapsed,” then the removal would not have been proper).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Murphy v. Airway Air Charter, Inc
Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir. 1989).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Susan Lynne Rohe v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 872 F.2d 963, 965-66 (11th Cir. 1989) (allowing post-judgment removal under the special removal statute applicable to the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation); Jackson v. Am.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Sawyer v. USAA Insurance
(3×)
also: Cited "see"
Sav. & LoanAss’n, 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989) (“In the instant case, in which removal and notice of appeal were timely, we will take the case as we find it on removal and treat everything that occurred in the state court as if it had taken place in the district court below.”).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Tony L. Ware v. Fleetboston Financial Corp.
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 872 F.2d 963, 965-66 (11th Cir.1989) (per curiam), we addressed the issue squarely and confirmed that, depending on the circumstances, a state action in which a final judgment had been entered could be removed to federal district court.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
FDIC v. Keating
Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th __________________________________ Cir. 1989) (per curiam) (analyzing predecessor to current FDIC removal statute).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
FDIC v. Keating
Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989) (per curiam) (analyzing predecessor to current FDIC removal statute).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Bayside Developers
Sav. & Loan Assoc., 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver for Banctexas Dallas, N.A., Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Letterman Brothers v. Stephen R. Desena, Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross-Appellants
Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989) (vacating remand and holding removal permissible because "[h]ad Congress intended to limit the removal power of the FSLIC to suits pending before a state trial court, it could have explicitly stated as much.").
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Federal Deposit Insurance v. Letterman Bros.
Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989) (vacating remand and holding removal permissible because “[h]ad Congress intended to limit the removal power of the FSLIC to suits pending before a state trial court, it could have explicitly stated as much.”).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Bakker
Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 872 F.2d 963, 964 (11th Cir.1989), the time for removal might well begin to run from the day on which the government corporation is appointed.” Jackson v. American Sav.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Ted G. Walker and James D. Brunson v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Etc., Ted G. Walker v. Mainland Savings Association, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Manager of the Fslic Resolution Fund, as Successor to the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, as Receiver for Mainland Savings Association
See also id. (a case removed from state court simply comes into the federal system in the same condition in which it left the state system) (citing Granny Goose Foods v. Brotherhood of Teamsters & Auto Truck Drivers, 415 U.S. 423, 436 , 94 S.Ct. 1113, 1122 , 39 L.Ed.2d 435, 449 (1974)); In re Savers Federal Savings and Loan Ass'n, 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989) (holding in FIRREA case that federal courts must "treat everything that occurred in the state court as if it had taken place" in federal court) 13 See Granny Goose Foods, 415 U.S. at 437 , 94 S.Ct. at 1123 , 39 L.Ed.2d at 449 (" ... …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Walker v. Federal Deposit Insurance
See also id. (a case removed from state court simply comes into the federal system in the same condition in which it left the state system) (citing Granny Goose Foods v. Brotherhood of Teamsters & Auto Truck Drivers, 415 U.S. 423, 436 , 94 S.Ct. 1113, 1122 , 39 L.Ed.2d 435, 449 (1974)); In re Savers Federal Savings and Loan Ass'n, 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989) (holding in FIRREA case that federal courts must "treat everything that occurred in the state court as if it had taken place” in federal court). 13 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Walker v. F.D.I.C.
See also id. (a case removed from state court simply comes into the federal system in the same condition in which it left the state system) (citing Granny Goose Foods v. Brotherhood of Teamsters & Auto Truck Drivers, 415 U.S. 423, 436 , 94 S.Ct. 1113, 1122 , 39 L.Ed.2d 435, 449 (1974)); In re Savers Federal Savings and Loan Ass'n, 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989) (holding in FIRREA case that federal courts must "treat everything that occurred in the state court as if it had taken place" in federal court). 13 See Granny Goose Foods, 415 U.S. at 437 , 94 S.Ct. at 1123 , 39 L.Ed.2d at 449 (" ...…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Seth Ward v. Resolution Trust Corporation, as Receiver for Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan Association Madison Financial Corporation
Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Alpert v. Resolution Trust Corp.
See, In re Meyerland Co., 960 F.2d 512 , 520 (5th Cir.1992); In re Savers Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n, 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Matter of Meyerland Co.
Furthermore, the contrast between the broad "a state court" and the specific "United States district court" within the same sentence strongly suggests that the drafters intended the meaning urged by the FDIC. 18 Like the Eleventh Circuit, which considered this issue under § 1819(b)'s predecessor statute, we can "discern no reason to confine the interpretation of 'action [from a State court]' to actions that have not reached judgment." In re Savers Federal Savings & Loan Assoc., 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Putnam v. DeRosa
Cf. In re Meyerland Co., 910 F.2d 1257 , 1262 (5th Cir.1990) (federal appellate court review of state trial court under 12 U.S.C. § 1819 (b)(2), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation statute similar to 12 U.S.C. § 1789 ); In re Savers Federal Sav. & Loan Assoc., 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989) (similar, involving 12 U.S.C. § 1730 (k)(1), Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation statute).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Michael Putnam and Maureen Putnam v. Steven J. Derosa, Etc., Triad Finance Corporation, Michael Putnam and Maureen Putnam v. Steven J. Derosa, Etc., Michael Putnam and Maureen Putnam v. Steven J. Derosa, Etc., Progressive Consumers Federal Credit Union, Michael Putnam and Maureen Putnam v. Steven J. Derosa, Etc., Robert Amirault and Derosa Properties, Inc.
Cf. In re Meyerland Co., 910 F.2d 1257 , 1262 (5th Cir.1990) (federal appellate court review of state trial court under 12 U.S.C. § 1819 (b)(2), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation statute similar to 12 U.S.C. § 1789 ); In re Savers Federal Sav. & Loan Assoc., 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989) (similar, involving 12 U.S.C. § 1730 (k)(1), Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation statute).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Federal Deposit Insurance v. Loyd
Corp., 931 F.2d 1530, 1537 (11th Cir.1991) (30-day period begins to run upon FDIC’s receipt of notice that it has been appointed receiver); In re Savers Federal Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 872 F.2d 963, 964 (11th Cir.1989) (per curiam) (FSLIC became a defendant under § 1446(b) on the day it was appointed conservator). .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Loyd
Corp., 931 F.2d 1530, 1537 (11th Cir.1991) (30-day period begins to run upon FDIC's receipt of notice that it has been appointed receiver); In re Savers Federal Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 872 F.2d 963, 964 (11th Cir.1989) (per curiam) (FSLIC became a defendant under § 1446(b) on the day it was appointed conservator) 15 But see Kirkbride v. Continental Cas.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Frank Gomez v. State of New Mexico
Abel v. West, 932 F.2d 898, 899 (10th Cir.1991); Hammons v. Int'l Playtex, Inc., 872 F.2d 963, 963 (10th Cir.1989).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Lazuka v. Federal Deposit Insurance
Although this issue is one of first impression in this circuit as it concerns the FDIC, we adopt the reasoning used by an earlier panel as applied to the FSLIC in In re Savers Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n, 872 F.2d 963, 965-66 (11th Cir.1989).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Lazuka v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
We disagree. 37 Although this issue is one of first impression in this circuit as it concerns the FDIC, we adopt the reasoning used by an earlier panel as applied to the FSLIC in In re Savers Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n, 872 F.2d 963, 965-66 (11th Cir.1989).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Woburn Five Cents Savings Bank v. Robert M. Hicks, Inc., Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
This pragmatic view of the FDIC’s status, which we believe is consistent with the liberal philosophy of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, follows the approach adopted by the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits and two district courts outside of those circuits, including one First Circuit court. *970 See In re Savers Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n, 872 F.2d 963, 964-65 (11th Cir.1989) (per curiam); North Mississippi Savings & Loan Ass’n v. Hudspeth, 756 F.2d 1096, 1100 (5th Cir.1985), overruled in part on other grounds, Coit Independence Joint Venture v. FSLIC, 489 U.S. 561 , 109 S.Ct. 1361 , 1…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Jackson v. American Savings Mortgage Corporation
Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 872 F.2d 963, 964 (11th Cir.1989), the time for removal might well begin to run from the day on which the government corporation is appointed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Jackson v. American Savings Mortgage Corp.
Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 872 F.2d 963, 964 (11th Cir.1989), the time for removal might well begin to run from the day on which the government corporation is appointed.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
In The Matter Of Meyerland Co.
(4×)
See, e.g., Beighley v. FDIC, 868 F.2d 776, 779 (5th Cir.1989); Northshore Development, Inc. v. Lee, 835 F.2d 580, 582 (5th Cir.1988); and In re Savers Federal Savings and Loan Ass'n, 872 F.2d 963, 964 (11th Cir.1989). 7 23 In In re Savers a debtor sued a financial institution in state court claiming as here, breach of contract and fraud and the institution counter claimed to recover on the debtor's note.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver of Twin City Savings, Fsa v. Robert L. McCullough and Mary Nan McCullough
R.Civ.P. 59(e) remains pending); cf. In re Savers Federal Savings & Loan Association, 872 F.2d 963, 964 (11th Cir.1989) (upon being appointed conservator of failed bank, the FSLIC automatically becomes party to lawsuit involving that bank).
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Federal Deposit Insurance v. Meyerland Co.
(4×)
See, e.g., Beighley v. FDIC, 868 F.2d 776, 779 (5th Cir.1989); Northshore Development, Inc. v. Lee, 835 F.2d 580, 582 (5th Cir.1988); and In re Savers Federal Savings and Loan Ass’n, 872 F.2d 963, 964 (11th Cir.1989). 7 In In re Savers a debtor sued a financial institution in state court claiming as here, breach of contract and fraud and the institution counter claimed to recover on the debtor’s note.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Key
(2×)
Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 872 F.2d 963, 966 (11th Cir.1989) (per curiam) (FSLIC authorized to remove case from state court after entry of final judgment); Beighley v. FDIC, 868 F.2d 776, 780-81 (5th Cir.1989) (FDIC empowered to remove case after entry of default judgment in state court); FDIC v. Taylor, 727 F.Supp. 326, 328 (S.D.Tex.1989) (FDIC authorized to remove case after entry of state court judgment); Vernon Sav. and Loan Ass’n v. Commerce Sav. and Loan Ass’n, 677 F.Supp. 495, 496-99 (N.D.Tex.1988) (FSLIC authorized to remove state court appeal). 2 The enactment of FIRREA *1089 does not a…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Taylor
Cf. In re Savers Federal Savings & Loan Association, 872 F.2d 963, 965-66 (11th Cir.1989) (rejecting argument that removal under former 12 U.S.C. § 1730 (k)(l) was limited to cases in which a state court judgment had not yet been entered). 1 Taylor makes two additional arguments, however, that FIRREA’s enactment did not moot.
cited
Cited "see"
O'MALLEY v. Town of Egremont
Accord Hammons v. Int’l Playtex, Inc., 676 F.Supp. 1114, 1118 (D.Wyo.1988), vacated on other grounds, 872 F.2d 963 (10th Cir.1989).
discussed
Cited "see"
Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Sellards
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See In re Savers, 872 F.2d at 966 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Parker v. Marcotte
See also Hammons v. Intern’l Playtex, Inc., 676 F.Supp. 1114, 1118 (D.Wyo.1988), vacated on other grounds, 872 F.2d 963 (10th Cir.1989).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Jarris R. HAMMONS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
INTERNATIONAL PLAYTEX, INC., a Corporation, Defendant-Appellee
v.
INTERNATIONAL PLAYTEX, INC., a Corporation, Defendant-Appellee
88-1218.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Apr 25, 1989.
McKay, Moore, Brorby.
Cited by 10 opinions | Published
ORDER
The court on its own motion vacates the order entered in this case on April 12, 1989 and recalls the mandate.
On the parties’ stipulated dismissal of this action, the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming in Hammons v. International Playtex, Inc., 676 F.Supp. 1114 (D.Wyo.1988), is VACATED, and the cause is REMANDED to the district court with instructions to dismiss the action. See Great Western Sugar Co. v. Nelson, 442 U.S. 92, 93, 99 S.Ct. 2149, 2149, 60 L.Ed.2d 735 (1979).
The mandate is reissued forthwith.