28 Cited authorities

Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.
505 U.S. 504 (1992) Cited 2,432 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that an express warranty was not a "requirement ... imposed under State law" because the obligation was imposed by the warrantor
Crosby v. Nat'l Foreign Trade Council
530 U.S. 363 (2000) Cited 1,007 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that a state law is not preempted when compliance with state law does not stand as an "obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress"
Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Ass'n
505 U.S. 88 (1992) Cited 907 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that "nonapproved state regulation of occupational safety and health issues for which a federal standard is in effect is impliedly preempted" by OSHA's standard
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.
510 U.S. 569 (1994) Cited 649 times 71 Legal Analyses
Holding that “[i]t was error for the Court of Appeals to conclude that the commercial nature of [a secondary work] rendered it presumptively unfair”
Valle Del Sol Inc. v. Whiting
732 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2013) Cited 152 times
Finding an Arizona immigration statute subject to obstacle preemption in part because it sought to punish conduct that Congress did not
Cnty. of Sonoma v. Fed. Hous. Fin. Agency
710 F.3d 987 (9th Cir. 2013) Cited 38 times
Holding that so long as a challenged action was "a lawful exercise of FHFA's power as conservator . . . the courts have no jurisdiction over Plaintiffs'-Appellees' claims, and this case must be dismissed"
King v. Long Beach Mortgage Company
672 F. Supp. 2d 238 (D. Mass. 2009) Cited 33 times
Holding a “plaintiff who has already commenced an action before the receivership must nevertheless ‘continue’ his or her action in one of the two districts designated in section 1821(d)”
F.D.I.C. v. McFarland
243 F.3d 876 (5th Cir. 2001) Cited 46 times
In FDIC v. McFarland, 243 F.3d 876 (5th Cir.2001), the court held that the “claim procedures articulated in [FIRREA] are predicated on the FDIC's possession of the property in question.
Leon Cnty., Fla. v. Fed. Hous. Fin. Agency
700 F.3d 1273 (11th Cir. 2012) Cited 17 times
No. 11–15614. 2012-11-9 LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA, Leon County Energy Improvement District, Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY, Acting Director of Federal Housing Finance Agency, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, Federal National Mortgage Association, Defendants–Appellees, Charles E. Haldeman, Jr., In his capacity as Chief Executive Officer of Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, et al., Defendants. Edwin A. Steinmeyer, Lewis, Longman & Walker, PA, Herbert W.A. Thiele, Cty
1185 Avenue of the Americas Associates v. Resolution Trust Corp.
22 F.3d 494 (2d Cir. 1994) Cited 37 times
Holding that, under 12 U.S.C. § 1821(e)(B), "whether [a contract] is burdensome is to be decided at the discretion of the conservator," and "there is no requirement that the conservator or receiver make a formal finding that a lease or contract is burdensome."
Section 1821 - Insurance Funds
12 U.S.C. § 1821 Cited 2,958 times 56 Legal Analyses
Granting FDIC standing to bring civil actions for money damages against the Bank's directors as the successor
Section 4617 - Authority over critically undercapitalized regulated entities
12 U.S.C. § 4617 Cited 670 times 4 Legal Analyses
Granting the FHFA the power to “operate” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and “to conduct all [of their] business”
Section 116.3116 - Liens against units for assessments
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 116.3116 Cited 701 times
Granting superpriority to the portion of the HOA's lien comprised of "any charges incurred by the association on a unit pursuant to NRS 116.310312"
Section 1452 - Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation
12 U.S.C. § 1452 Cited 302 times 1 Legal Analyses
Providing that Freddie “shall be exempt from all [state and local] taxation, ... except that any real property of [Freddie] shall be subject to State local taxation to the same extent ... as other real property is taxed”
Section 1723a - General powers of Government National Mortgage Association and Federal National Mortgage Association
12 U.S.C. § 1723a Cited 156 times 5 Legal Analyses
Granting Fannie Mae power to "lease purchase, or acquire any property, real personal, or mixed" and to "do all things as are necessary or incidental to the proper management of its affairs and to the proper conduct of its business"
Section 1825 - Issuance of notes, debentures, bonds, and other obligations; exemptions
12 U.S.C. § 1825 Cited 143 times 2 Legal Analyses
Stating that "[n]o property of the Corporation [i.e. FDIC] shall be subject to levy, attachment, garnishment, foreclosure or sale without the consent of the Corporation, nor shall any involuntary lien attach to the property of the Corporation"

Saticoy Bay, LLC Series 1702 Empire Mine v. Federal National Mortgage Association et al

28 Cited authorities

Holding that an express warranty was not a "requirement ... imposed under State law" because the obligation was imposed by the warrantor

Holding that a state law is not preempted when compliance with state law does not stand as an "obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress"

Holding that "nonapproved state regulation of occupational safety and health issues for which a federal standard is in effect is impliedly preempted" by OSHA's standard

Holding that “[i]t was error for the Court of Appeals to conclude that the commercial nature of [a secondary work] rendered it presumptively unfair”

Finding an Arizona immigration statute subject to obstacle preemption in part because it sought to punish conduct that Congress did not

Holding that so long as a challenged action was "a lawful exercise of FHFA's power as conservator . . . the courts have no jurisdiction over Plaintiffs'-Appellees' claims, and this case must be dismissed"

Holding a “plaintiff who has already commenced an action before the receivership must nevertheless ‘continue’ his or her action in one of the two districts designated in section 1821(d)”

In FDIC v. McFarland, 243 F.3d 876 (5th Cir.2001), the court held that the “claim procedures articulated in [FIRREA] are predicated on the FDIC's possession of the property in question.

Holding that, under 12 U.S.C. § 1821(e)(B), "whether [a contract] is burdensome is to be decided at the discretion of the conservator," and "there is no requirement that the conservator or receiver make a formal finding that a lease or contract is burdensome."

Granting FDIC standing to bring civil actions for money damages against the Bank's directors as the successor

Granting the FHFA the power to “operate” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and “to conduct all [of their] business”

Granting superpriority to the portion of the HOA's lien comprised of "any charges incurred by the association on a unit pursuant to NRS 116.310312"

Providing that Freddie “shall be exempt from all [state and local] taxation, ... except that any real property of [Freddie] shall be subject to State local taxation to the same extent ... as other real property is taxed”

Granting Fannie Mae power to "lease purchase, or acquire any property, real personal, or mixed" and to "do all things as are necessary or incidental to the proper management of its affairs and to the proper conduct of its business"

Stating that "[n]o property of the Corporation [i.e. FDIC] shall be subject to levy, attachment, garnishment, foreclosure or sale without the consent of the Corporation, nor shall any involuntary lien attach to the property of the Corporation"