Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Connecticut opinions name it 1 courts 1993–1998 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Connecticut courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Langley v. Federal Deposit Insurance
green
2 sentences1993The common law D'Oench doctrine and 18 U.S.C. § 1823 (e) bar the assertion against the FDIC of any defense premised on any unrecorded agreement between the borrower and a failed institution that does not satisfy all four requirements of 1823(e). 2 The term "agreement" under the common law and as used in 1823(e) is defined broadly to include all conditions upon performance, Langley v. FDIC, 484 U.S. 86 , 91 , 108 S.Ct. 396 , 98 L.Ed.2d 340 (1987), and any "scheme or arrangement that is likely to mislead the banking authorities." Id. at 93 ; D'Oench, Duhme Co. v. FDIC, 315 U.S. at 460 . 1993The common law D'Oench doctrine and 18 U.S.C. § 1823 (e) bar the assertion against the FDIC of any defense premised on any unrecorded agreement between the borrower and a failed institution that does not satisfy all four requirements of 1823(e). 2 The term "agreement" under the common law and as used in 1823(e) is defined broadly to include all conditions upon performance, Langley v. FDIC, 484 U.S. 86 , 91 , 108 S.Ct. 396 , 98 L.Ed.2d 340 (1987), and any "scheme or arrangement that is likely to mislead the banking authorities." Id. at 93 ; D'Oench, Duhme Co. v. FDIC, 315 U.S. at 460 . | 4 | 1993–1998 |
Federal Deposit Ins. v. Briarwood Dev., No. Cv92 295867 (Sep. 3, 1993)
green
1 sentence1994"The common law D'Oench doctrine and [12] U.S.C. § 1823(e) bar the assertion against the FDIC of any defense premised on any unrecorded agreement between the borrower and a failed institution that does not satisfy all four requirements of 1823(e)." Federal Deposit Ins. v. Briarwood Devel., 8 CSCR 1082 (September 3, 1993, Lager, J.). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
D'Oench, Duhme & Co. v. Federal Deposit Insurance
green
1 sentence1993The common law D'Oench doctrine and 18 U.S.C. § 1823 (e) bar the assertion against the FDIC of any defense premised on any unrecorded agreement between the borrower and a failed institution that does not satisfy all four requirements of 1823(e). 2 The term "agreement" under the common law and as used in 1823(e) is defined broadly to include all conditions upon performance, Langley v. FDIC, 484 U.S. 86 , 91 , 108 S.Ct. 396 , 98 L.Ed.2d 340 (1987), and any "scheme or arrangement that is likely to mislead the banking authorities." Id. at 93 ; D'Oench, Duhme Co. v. FDIC, 315 U.S. at 460 . | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Alan P. Vernon v. Resolution Trust Corporation
green
1 sentence1993While the statute only "partially" codifies the D'Oench doctrine, see Vernon v. Resolution Trust Corp., 907 F.2d 1101 , 1105 (11th Cir. CT Page 7958-J 1990), "courts have found the aims of section 1823(e) and D'Oench identical and thus have construed defenses premised upon section 1823(e) and D'Oench in tandem." Twin Construction. | 1 | 1993–1993 |