Resolution Trust Corporation v. Lightfoot’s Empirical Analysis
938 F.2d 65 · 1991
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 12 U.S.C. § 1441A · 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447
Relies on Bradley v. School Board of City of Richmond · Land US v. Dollar · Lord Electric Co. v. United States · Thermtron Products, Inc. v. Hermansdorfer · Crawford Fitting Company v. Jt Gibbons Inc Champion International Corporation
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“FIRREA does not prohibit RTC from removing cases to the district where the state court suit was pending; it simply provides that RTC may remove to the District of Columbia or the district where the institution’s principal business is located. If Congress intended FIRREA to provide the exclusive venue for removal, it did not say so, and we will not presume that it wished to repeal an existing statutory removal provision sub silentio____ The FIRREA removal provision would be clearer if it included a preface acknowledging the baseline removal provision of [28 U.S.C.] § 1441(a), but the mandate of § 1441(a) is nonetheless sufficiently clear to resolve any ambiguity created by the absence of such a notation. FIRREA does not expressly prohibit RTC from removing cases under 28 U.S.C. § 1441 (a) and we therefore read its removal provisions to supplement, rather than to replace, those of § 1441(a).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(Z) Power to remove; jurisdiction. (1) In general. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any civil action, suit, or proceeding to which the Corporation is a party shall be deemed to arise under the laws of the United States, and the United States district courts shall have original jurisdiction over such action, suit, or proceeding. (2) Corporation [RTC] as party. The Corporation shall be substituted as a party in any civil action, suit, or proceeding to which its predecessor in interest was a party with respect to institutions which are subject to the management agreement dated February 7, 1989, among the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, the Federal Home Loan Bank Board and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. (3) Removal and remand. The Corporation may, without bond or security, remove any such action, suit, or proceeding from a State court to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, or if the action, suit, or proceeding arises out of the actions of the Corporation with respect to an institution for which a conservator or a receiver has been appointed, the United States district court for the district where the institution’s principal business is located. The removal of any action, suit, or proceeding shall be instituted— (A) not later than 90 days after the date the Corporation is substituted as a party, or (B) not later than 30 days after the date suit is filed against the Corporation, if such suit is filed after the date o”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any civil action, suit, or proceeding to which the [Resolution Trust] Corporation is a party shall be deemed to arise under the laws of the United States, and the United States district courts shall have original jurisdiction over such action, suit, or proceeding.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.