X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Two conflicting U.S. Court of Federal Claims decisions assessing damages owed by the government to the savings and loan industry have left attorneys representing New York-based thrifts in similar litigation scratching their heads.

Though looked to as potential benchmarks, the two recent decisions, Glendale Federal Bank v. U.S., 1999 U.S. Claims Lexis 70, and California Federal Bank v. U.S., No. 92-138c, are hard to reconcile because they differed widely in both the amount of damages awarded and the legal theories applied.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.