Search for: "In Re: FDIC"
Results 301 - 320
of 704
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Apr 2011, 11:57 pm
" http://ow.ly/4Ivki D.DC.: Truism 2-"Effect of agr. to reimburse attys for litig. re their fees will be to incentivize litig. re their fees. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 8:55 am
In short, don't even think about trying to get special treatment when we're in charge, but have at it in front of the bankruptcy judges. [read post]
25 Apr 2011, 7:35 pm
Critics of Snowe respond that the authorizing legislation already bars banks on the FDIC's troubled institution list from participating. [read post]
20 Apr 2011, 6:23 am
I sure hope not, because if so… you’re just not thinking about these issues carefully enough. [read post]
15 Apr 2011, 7:50 pm
The companies are required to hire consultants to re-evaluate foreclosures from 2009 and 2010 and will have to reimburse homeowners if discrepancies are found in the foreclosure's processing. [read post]
13 Apr 2011, 10:53 am
. -- Unlike some areas of law, consumer protection affects everyone, because we're all consumers. [read post]
11 Apr 2011, 5:39 am
If you’re making agreements with, or relying on assurances from, a bank – regardless of whether it’s related to a loan – you ignore the 4 Requirements at your peril [read post]
10 Apr 2011, 7:42 pm
Again, the FDIC alleges that examiners warned the bank of these risks and that the warnings were ignored. [read post]
8 Apr 2011, 6:37 am
See FDIC v. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 10:05 am
SIPC ignores this requirement, though it was a “principal purpose” and “essential feature” of the 1978 amendments; • That investors are to be protected against theft, which occurred here on a massive scale;• That SIPA creates an insurance program modeled after the FDIC. [read post]
4 Apr 2011, 5:57 am
If you’re at all involved in real estate litigation or foreclosure click here to watch an excellent 60 minutes piece. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 7:02 pm
The case is In re Tribune Co., 08-13141, U.S. [read post]
22 Mar 2011, 9:12 am
The lack of FDIC insurance is not prominently disclosed, if it is disclosed at all. [read post]
21 Mar 2011, 7:52 pm
One strike and you're out. [read post]
20 Mar 2011, 7:35 pm
But in fact, watchdogs should bask in such disdain if it means they're doing their jobs [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 7:31 am
I just can’t help but wonder when, if ever, we’re going to see any action taken against any of the “too-big-to-fail” financial institutions, or perhaps the reality is that they’re “too-big-to-prosecute,” as well. 2. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 7:45 am
If it all goes pear-shaped, of course, you're going to have to deal with bailouts and flash sales - but that too goes to safety and soundness. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 7:30 pm
They don't trust the OCC to do anything other than cheer the banks on, and they're not real big on the Fed or FDIC. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 5:00 am
This was before the days of the FDIC and insured deposits. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 5:00 am
This was before the days of the FDIC and insured deposits. [read post]
