MIDLAND COOPERATIVE WHOLESALE, INC.

v.

ICKES, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• In re Israel-British Bank (London) Ltd. v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., 536 F.2d 509 (2d Cir. 1976)
  …limit the exception. Korherr v. Bumb, 262 F. 2d 157, 162 (9 Cir. 1958); see Piedmont & Northern Ry. v. ICC, 286 U.S. 299, 311-12, 52 S.Ct. 541, 76 L.Ed. 1115 (1932); Midland Cooperative Wholesale v. Ickes, 125 F. 2d 618, 626 (8 Cir.), cert. denied, 316 U.S. 673, 62 S.Ct. 1045, 86 L.Ed. 1748 (1942); In re Bay Cities Guaranty Building-Loan Ass’n, 48 F. 2d 623, 624 (S.D.Cal.1931). As the Court said in Piedmont & Northern Ry. v. ICC, supra, 286 U.S. at 311-12, 52 S.Ct. at 545: “The . . . Act was remedial legi…
• Union Nat'l Bank OF Little Rock v. Farmers Bank, 786 F.2d 881 (8th Cir. 1986)
  …the parties to a transaction or from the circumstances under which it takes place.” Bain v. Deal, 251 Ark. 905, 475 S.W. 2d 708, 713 (Ark.1972) (quoting Kersh Lake Drainage District v. Johnson, 203 Ark. 315, 157 S.W. 2d 39, 45 (1941), cert. denied, 316 U.S. 673, 62 S.Ct. 1044, 86 L.Ed. 1748 (1942)). Farmers urges that this language demonstrates that constructive fraud applies only in certain limited situations as an exception to the general rule. It argues that there are no special circumstances which wou…
• Hazen v. S. Hills Nat'l Bank OF Tulsa, 414 F.2d 778 (10th Cir. 1969)
  …indispensable party to the action. Koster v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co., 330 U.S. 518, 522-523, n. 2, 67 S.Ct. 828, 91 L.Ed. 1067; Greenberg v. Giannini, 2 Cir., 140 F. 2d 550, 554; cf. Coyle v. Skirvin, 10 Cir., 124 F. 2d 934, 938, cert. denied 316 U.S. 673, 62 S.Ct. 1044, 86 L.Ed. 1748. The old [*780] bank was not joined as a party and no claim is made that the requirements of Rule 23 were satisfied. In oral argument before this court the plaintiff asserted that the action is individual because he wa…