Leasing v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

Texas Supreme Court

Leasing v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

835 S.W.2d 74, 35 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1028, 1992 Tex. LEXIS 84

CourtTexas Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 1, 1992

DocketNo. D-0572

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 835 S.W.2d 74 (Leasing v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Leasing v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., 835 S.W.2d 74, 35 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1028, 1992 Tex. LEXIS 84 (Tex. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The opinion of the court of appeals held that the FDIC had power to assert certain federal defenses for the first time on appeal under a provision in the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”). 800 S.W.2d 231. The issues raised in petitioners’ application for writ of error are substantially similar to those addressed by this court’s recent opinion in Larsen v. FDIC, 835 S.W.2d 66. Pursuant to Tex.R.App.P. 170, without hearing argument, a majority of the court grants petitioners’ application, reverses the judgment of the court of ap[75]*75peals, and remands this cause to that court for further consideration consistent with Larsen. We expressly reserve issues not decided in Larsen. In particular, should the court of appeals reverse the judgment on grounds other than the PDIC’s special federal defenses, we express no opinion on whether the court may then consider those special defenses to avoid remanding the cause to the trial court.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The opinion of the court of appeals held that the FDIC had power to assert certain federal defenses for the first time on appeal under a provision in the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”). 800 S.W.2d 231. The issues raised in petitioners’ application for writ of error are substantially similar to those addressed by this court’s recent opinion in Larsen v. FDIC, 835 S.W.2d 66. Pursuant to Tex.R.App.P. 170, without hearing argument, a majority of the court grants petitioners’ application, reverses the judgment of the court of ap[75]*75peals, and remands this cause to that court for further consideration consistent with Larsen. We expressly reserve issues not decided in Larsen. In particular, should the court of appeals reverse the judgment on grounds other than the PDIC’s special federal defenses, we express no opinion on whether the court may then consider those special defenses to avoid remanding the cause to the trial court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

835 S.W.2d 74, 35 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 1028, 1992 Tex. LEXIS 84, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leasing-v-federal-deposit-insurance-corp-tex-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack