D.C. Circuit

Hope 7 Monroe Street LP v. Riaso, LLC (In the Matter of Hope 7 Monroe Street LP)

Citation: 
Hope 7 Monroe Street LP, U.S. Court of Appeals D.C. Cir., No. 12-7054 [February 28, 2014]
Ruling: 
The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, held that the district court did not err in affirming the bankruptcy courts rulings. The district court's decision affirmed the ruling by the bankruptcy court to deny, appellants, Hope 7's motion ...
Judge(s): 
Ginsburg, Henderson and Brown
Read on...

Youkelsone v. FDIC

Citation: 
Case No. 1:09-cv-01278 (D.C. Cir. Nov. 8, 2011)
Ruling: 
The Court reversed and remanded the district court's sua sponte ruling that Plaintiff lacked standing under Rule 12(b)(1). The Court ruled that Rule 4(a)(5)(C) is a claim-processing rule, not a jurisdictional bar, and failure to object on timeliness grounds ...
Judge(s): 
Tatel, Brown, and Willams
Read on...

American National Insurance Co. v. FDIC

Citation: 
No. 10-5245 (D.C. Cir. June 24, 2011)
Ruling: 
Reversing the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (the “D.C. District Court”), the D.C. Circuit held that §1821(d) of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recover and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”) did not bar the D.C. District Court from ...
Judge(s): 
Sentelle, Tatel, Randolph
Read on...

McKinley v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

Citation: 
No. 10-5353 (D.C. Cir. June 3, 2011)
Ruling: 
Affirming the District Court, the D.C. Circuit held that under Exception 5 of the Freedom of Information Act (the “FOIA”), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Fed. Board”) could withhold certain documents containing information that the ...
Judge(s): 
Henderson, Garland and Griffith
Read on...

Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Ray

Citation: 
DC Circuit Case No. 10-7029
Ruling: 
The Rail Act does not preclude Conrail's (purchaser of former bankrupt company's assets) liability for an employee's exposure to asbestos where the exposure occurred prior to Conrail taking over operations because: (1) the Rail Act only stated Conrail was to ...
Read on...
Syndicate content