Westfed Holdings, Inc. v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 12 U.S.C. § 1437 · 28 U.S.C. § 1491 · 28 U.S.C. § 2514 · 28 U.S.C. § 2516 · 31 U.S.C. § 3727
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · United States v. Testan · Land US v. Dollar · Juidice v. Vail
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The FSLIC will forbear from taking action pursuant to Section 563.13 of the Rules and Regulations for Insurance of Accounts (“Insurance Regulations”) for any failure by New Western to comply with its regulatory capital requirement provided for in Section 563.13 as long as New Western satisfies either (1) the regulatory capital maintenance requirement or (2) the net worth maintenance requirement set forth in Section 2 of the Regulatory Capital Maintenance Agreement (either of which may be referred to herein as the “Modified Capital Requirement.”)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“So long as New Western is in compliance with its Modified Capital Requirement [“MCR”] it will be deemed in compliance with any form of minimum capital test or calculation to which it is or becomes subject pursuant to the Insurance Regulations, to the extent, in the opinion of the [Principal Supervisory Agent (“PSA”)], not inconsistent [sic] with the purposes of any such regulation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“To be sure, the Act permits assignment of “any part of a claim against the United States Government or of an interest in the claim,” see 31 U.S.C. § 3727 (a)(1) (2001), but the partial assignments that the Act permits are for allowed claims, not pending claims. See 31 U.S.C. § 3727 (b) (2001). Partial assignments of claims that have already been allowed, and for which a warrant for payment has already been issued, do not pose the same danger of complex litigation as partial assignments of pending claims. The conflict over whether Mr. Simon or PWC [PricewaterhouseCoopers] is the true assignee of Westfed’s claims seems illustrative of difficulties that the Act seeks to forestall.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.