Adams v. Madison Realty & Development, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
937 F.2d 845 · 1991
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 12 district · 11 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 12 U.S.C. § 1441A · 12 U.S.C. § 1823 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1404
Relies on D'Oench, Duhme & Co. v. Federal Deposit Insurance · United States 77-1359 v. Kimbell Foods Inc · Langley v. Federal Deposit Insurance · Ferens v. John Deere Co. · Vernon v. Resolution Trust Corp.
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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No agreement which tends to diminish or defeat the interest of the Corporation in any asset acquired by it under this section or section 1821 of this title, either as security for a loan or by purchase or as receiver of any insured depository institution, shall be valid against the Corporation unless such agreement— (1) is in writing, (2) was executed by the depository institution and any person claiming an adverse interest thereunder, including the obligor, contemporaneously with the acquisition of the asset by the depository institution, (3) was approved by the board of directors of the depository institution or its loan committee, which approval shall be reflected in the minutes of said board or committee, and (4) has been, continuously, from the time of its execution, an official record of the depository institution.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) In general. No agreement which tends to diminish or defeat the interest of the Corporation in any asset acquired by it under this section or section [12 U.S.C.A § 1821], either as security for a loan or by purchase or as receiver of any insured depository institution, shall be valid against the Corporation unless such agreement— (A) is in writing, (B) was executed by the depository institution and any person claiming an adverse interest thereunder, including the obligor, contemporaneously with the acquisition of the asset by the depository institution, (C) was approved by the board of directors of the depository institution or its loan committee, which approval shall be reflected in the minutes of said board or committee, and (D) has been, continuously, from the time of its execution, an official record of the depository institution.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The rule emerging from D'Oench, Duhme is that no agreement between a borrower and a bank which does not plainly appear on the face of an obligation or in the bank's official records is enforceable against the FDIC.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Eastern Savings Bank, Fsb v. Ruffolo, No. 1cv89 0102821 (Aug. 28, 1996) · Riccardo Dimuzio Ruth Dimuzio, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Resolution Trust Corporation in Its Capacity as Receiver of Carteret Savings Bank, F.A. And in Its Capacity as Conservator of Carteret Federal Savings Bank (d.c. Civil No. 94-Cv-01559). Riccardo Dimuzio Ruth Dimuzio v. Resolution Trust Corporation as Conservator of Carteret Federal Savings Bank and Carteret Savings Bank (d.c. Civil No. 94-Cv-04800). Kazuyuki Kameda Taneko Kameda Esmie J. Wint, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Resolution Trust Corporation as Conservator of Carteret Federal Savings Bank and Carteret Savings Bank (d.c. Civil No. 94-Cv-04831). Appeal of Riccardo Dimuzio, Ruth Dimuzio, Kazuyuki Kameda, Taneko Kameda and Esmie Wint
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.