HWANG JUNG JOO

v.

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE

Citator

Cited By

• Resolution Tr. Corp. v. Dunmar Corp. & Michael D. Jones, 43 F.3d 587 (11th Cir. 1995)
  …ve claims which are based upon an alleged oral agreement to lend money in the future); Hall v. FDIC, 920 F. 2d 334, 339 (6th Cir.) (D’Oench doctrine held to protect the FDIC even where the FDIC does not have “an interest in an asset”), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1231, 111 S.Ct. 2852, 115 L.Ed.2d 1020 (1991); Bowen v. FDIC, 915 F. 2d 1013, 1016 (5th Cir.1990) (applying D’Oench and holding that the “agreement need not implicate a specific obligation, such as a note dr other asset held by the FDIC”); Bell & Murphy…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Motorcity OF Jacksonville, Ltd. v. Se. Bank N.A., 83 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir. 1996)
  …4, 339 (6th Cir.1990) (“D’Oench is important for allowing banking authorities to determine exactly what a bank’s assets and liabilities are ... [and] may therefore be invoked even where FDIC does not have ‘an interest in an asset.’ ”), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 1231, 111 S.Ct. 2852, 115 L.Ed.2d 1020 (1991). Motorcity’s argument, that repaying a loan before filing tort claims precludes the FDIC from invoking the D’Oench doctrine, would result in absurdity. For example, suppose that a plaintiff wished to bring…

  ← 1 / 2 →