CANFIELD ET AL.

v.

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Citator

Cited By

• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Angelique O. Stahl, 89 F.3d 1510 (11th Cir. 1996)
  …In Frates, the Tenth Circuit held that § 1821(k) supersedes federal common law predicating liability upon simple negligence, while specifically reaffirming its holding in FDIC v. Canfield, 967 F. 2d 443, 448 (10th Cir.) (en banc), cert. dismissed, 506 U.S. 993, 113 S.Ct. 516, 121 L.Ed.2d 527 (1992), in which it concluded § 1821(k) does not preempt state law simple negligence claims against directors. Frates, 52 F. 3d at 296-97. More specifically, the Canfield and McSweeney courts found that § 1821(k) do…
• Atherton v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. for City Sav., 519 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1997)
  …mple negligence. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. McSweeney, 976 F. 2d 532, 537, n. 5 (CA9 1992), cert. denied, 508 U. S. 950 (1993); Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Canfield, 967 F. 2d 443, 446, n. 3 (CA10) (en banc), cert. dism’d, 506 U. S. 993 (1992); Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Swager, 773 F. Supp. 1244 (Minn. 1991). See also Pet. for Cert, i (“The questions presented for review are: 1. Whether Section 1821(k) supplants ‘federal common law’ and constitutes the exclusive st…