Federal Housing Finance Agency v. UBS Americas Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that Lockhart’s duties as FHFA director were “germane” to his duties as OFHEO director and therefore he did not need to be renominated and reconfirmed
• noting that 12 U.S.C. 4617(b)(12) “sets forth ‘the applicable statute of limitations with regard to any action brought by [FHFA] as conservator or receiver’”
• explaining that in Section 11 claims, “due diligence cannot be asserted as a basis for dismissal pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6)”
• explaining that the two types of statutes “are distinct,” that “statutes of repose affect the underlying right, not just the remedy,” and that “a statute of repose may bar a claim even before the plaintiff suffers injury, leaving her without any remedy”
• reviewing de novo the denial of a motion to dismiss an action as time‐barred by a statute of repose
• reviewing de novo the denial of a motion to dismiss an action as time‐barred by a statute of repose

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).