Federal Deposit Insurance v. Mutual Communications Associates, Inc.

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion. I would conclude, on the basis of the facts found by the trial court, that it is inequitable *407and contrary to public policy to allow Robert Rossman’s attorney, Andrew Buzzi, Jr., and Rossman’s spouse, Catherine Rossman, to purchase the promissory note, guarantees and deficiency judgment at 10 percent of its face value for the purpose of protecting Robert Ross-man from the deficiency judgment, and then to seek payment based on its face value from two of the other guarantors.

I do not quarrel with either the majority or the trial court’s legal…