Legal Opinion
Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Moss
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided November 5, 1991No. 69253PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*615SUMMERS, Justice.
As a result of the downturn in Oklahoma’s economy during the 1980’s the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has become a major litigant in many courthouses. In today’s case the FDIC has functioned in two capacities: one as receiver of a failed bank to which money was owed on a note, and another as insurer of a second failed bank alleged to owe money to a depositor. The FDIC in these two capacities is brought together here because the debtor of the first failed bank happens to be the depositor of the second. Our issue is framed by FDIC’s claim that it must be treated…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,654 William L. Gunter and Camille S. Gunter v. Theodore M. HutchesonCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1982
- Runyon v. ReidSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1973
- Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Marcelino Roldan FonsecaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1986
- Stuckey v. Young Exploration Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1978
- Banco Nacional De Cuba, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Chase Manhattan Bank, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Markwell v. Whinery's Real Estate, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1994
- Bowers v. WimberlySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1997
- Buck's Sporting Goods, Inc. of Tulsa v. First National Bank & Trust Co. of TulsaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1994
- Brown v. Oklahoma State Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1993
- Bird v. ColemanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1997
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.