First Commerce Corporation, and Fdic, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and First Commerce Savings Bank v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “[w]e agree ... that First Commerce’s formal [acquisition of Mutual] application ... [was] definite enough to constitute an offer”
• finding that First Commerce’s formal conversion application, considering the relationship between the parties and totality of circumstances, was definite and complete enough to constitute an offer
• holding that a binding agreement requires an unambiguous acceptance
• stating that defendant’s “argument that the government is immune from contractual liability because it was acting in its regulatory capacity was rejected squarely by this court and the Supreme Court in Wins-tar”
• stating that “we decline to address” the remaining defenses of the government (including the issue of statutory authority) because this “court did not reach [them] in light of its disposition of the case on summary judgment”
• stating that “[t]he government surely was acting in its regulatory capacity”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).