Perry Capital LLC v. Lew

How courts have described this case

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

• declining to rely on Omnia as an alternate basis for dismissal because Omnia was decided “just five months after the concept of a regulatory taking was born, and many decades before the Supreme Court began actively developing its regulatory takings jurisprudence”
• “A [party] is not required to demonstrate favorable results under all three Penn Central factors ... it is a balancing test.”
• “Without providing an additional funding commitment. or receiving new securities from the [Companies] as consideration for its Third Amendment to the already existing PSPAs, Treasury cannot be said to have purchased new securities (internal citation omitted)
• “[I]f FHFA, as a conservator, or receiver, , signs a contract with another government entity that is acting beyond the scope of its HERA powers, then FHFA is functionally complicit in its counterparty's misconduct, and such unlawful actions may be imputed to FHFA.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).