MARYLAND HIGHER EDUCATION LOAN CORPORATION
v.
CAVAZOS, SECRETARY OF EDUCATION, ET AL.; SOUTH CAROLINA STATE EDUCATION ASSISTANCE AUTHORITY V. CAVAZOS, SECRETARY OF EDUCATION, ET AL.; AND NORTH CAROLINA ET AL. V. UNITED STATES ET AL.
MARYLAND HIGHER EDUCATION LOAN CORPORATION
CAVAZOS, SECRETARY OF EDUCATION, ET AL.; SOUTH CAROLINA STATE EDUCATION ASSISTANCE AUTHORITY V. CAVAZOS, SECRETARY OF EDUCATION, ET AL.; AND NORTH CAROLINA ET AL. V. UNITED STATES ET AL.
498 U.S. 895
Supreme Court of the United States (1990)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 10 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
M.E. Lassiter and Donna Marie Lassiter v. Resolution Tr. Corp., 610 So. 2d 531 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)…Baumann v. Savers Federal Savings & Loan Association, 934 F. 2d 1506 (11th Cir.1991), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 1936, 118 L.Ed.2d 543 (1992); Bell & Murphy Associates v. Interfirst Bank Gateway, N.A., 894 F. 2d 750 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 895, 111 S.Ct. 244, 112 L.Ed.2d 203 (1990); Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Wood, 758 F. 2d 156 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 944, 106 S.Ct. 308, 88 L.Ed.2d 286 (1985). In its 1989 version, § 1823(e) provides as follows: (e) Agreements against…
-
Resolution Tr. Corp. v. Dunmar Corp. & Michael D. Jones, 43 F.3d 587 (11th Cir. 1995)…terfirst Bank Gateway, N.A., 894 F. 2d 750, 753 (5th Cir.) (rejecting argument that D’Oench “bars only claims or defenses based upon unrecorded side agreements that defeat the FDIC’s interest in a specific asset acquired from a bank”), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 895, 111 S.Ct. 244, 112 L.Ed.2d 203 (1990). Fueling these decisions is the recognition that to distinguish between affirmative claims and defenses for purposes of D’Oench would reduce the D’Oench doctrine’s protection to a nullity. Timberland Design v…
-
Motorcity OF Jacksonville, Ltd. v. Se. Bank N.A., 83 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir. 1996)…N.A., 894 F. 2d 750, 754 (5th Cir.) (“The D’Oench, Duhme doctrine ... favors the interests of depositors and creditors of a failed bank, who cannot protect themselves from secret agreements, over the interests of borrowers, who can.”), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 895, 111 S.Ct. 244, 112 L.Ed.2d 203 (1990); In re NEW Commercial Paper Litigation, 826 F.Supp. 1448, 1461-62 (D.D.C.1992) (describing D’Oench and § 1823(e) as “a regime that places the risk on borrowers if they do not get all of the terms of their agree…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence