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This content has been archived.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 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]