Legal Opinion
McMillan v. MBank Fort Worth, N.A.
District Court, N.D. Texas
Decided January 16, 1990No. Civ. A. No. 4-89-328-KPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
BELEW, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion to Vacate the Judgment of the State Court pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6). After careful consideration of the respective briefs and the applicable law, it is the opinion of this Court that the Plaintiffs’ Motion should be denied.
I. FACTS
The causes of action asserted by the Plaintiffs arose from an oral commitment made by the Defendant, (MBank), to loan the Plaintiffs 3.5 million dollars. MBank failed to loan the money and the Plaintiffs brought this action. MBank counterclaimed against the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Ackermann v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Seven Elves, Incorporated v. Jack S. Eskenazi, Esko Industries, Inc., Gary Liebman and Jack RibackCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- Harold v. Beighley v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1989
- R. Michael Butner v. Ingrid NeustadterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1963
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- McMillan v. MBank Fort Worth, N.A.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993
- McMillan v. MBank Fort Worth, N.A.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993