Marc Development, Inc. v. Federal Deposit Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that court is not bound by the plain meaning of statute if it would thwart the obvious purpose of the statute
• stating that court is not bound by the plain meaning of statute if it would thwart the obvious purpose of the statute
• “The term ‘continue’ implies that a party is proceeding forward in an ongoing case without an interruption in the court’s jurisdiction.”
• concurrent claims permissible under § 1821(d), subject to a 90 day stay as provided in 12 U.S.C. § 1821(d)(12)(A)(ii)
• “To read the jurisdiction limit as not drawing a distinction between suits filed before and after the receivership would lead to the waste of considerable legal efforts.”
• under FIRREA, pre-receivership lawsuits proceed without interruption subject only to 90 day stay

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).