SETH WARD, APPELLEE,
v.
RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION, AS CONSERVATOR FOR MADISON GUARANTY SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, APPELLANT
PER CURIAM.
This appeal is moot. The Resolution Trust Corporation has removed the case for a second time to the District Court, and the other side has abandoned any contest of the propriety of this removal. It therefore does not matter whether or not the initial order of remand was in error. Whichever way that question is decided, the second removal petition is uncontested, and the case will go forward in the District Court. The second removal petition, filed under the terms of the new statute, Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), Pub.L. No. 101-73, 1989 U.S.Code Cong. & Admin. News (103 Stat.) 183 (codified as amended 12 U.S.C. § 1821, et seq.), makes it unnecessary to decide whether the first removal was proper. The appeal is dismissed as moot. Our mandate will issue forthwith. The District Court should now proceed with the case pending before it.
It is so ordered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ward v. Resolution Tr. Corp. for Madison Guar. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 972 F.2d 196 (8th Cir. 1992)
-
Hellon & Assocs., Inc. v. Phoenix Resort Corp., 958 F.2d 295 (9th Cir. 1992)
-
Barnett Bank of S. Fla. v. Fed. Deposit Ins., 883 F. Supp. 707 (S.D. Fla. 1995)…ly v. Waukesha County Wis., 993 F.2d 1284 (7th Cir.1993); In re Savers Federal Savings & Loan, 872 F.2d 963 (11th *709 Cir.1989); Resolution Trust Corp. v. Allen, 16 F.3d 568 (4th Cir.1994); Ward v. Resolution Trust Corp., 901 F.2d 694 (8th Cir.1990); Resolution Trust Corp. v. BVS Development, Inc., 42 F.3d 1206 (9th Cir.1994). Hence, the Court will put aside its constitutional and jurisprudential doubts concerning such a framework, while simply noting its agreement with muc…