The Congress enacted FIRREA "in the midst of the savings and loan insolvency crisis to enable the FDIC ... to expeditiously wind up the affairs of literally hundreds of failed financial institutions throughout the country." Freeman v. FDIC, 56 F.3d 1394, 1398 (D.C.Cir.1995) (citing H.R. REP. No. 101-54(I), reprinted in 1989 U.S.C.C.A.N. 86, 87, 103). FIRREA confers broad powers on the FDIC in its capacity as receiver for failed depository institutions. See id. at 1398-99. Its powers include the authority to repudiate any contract "(A) to which [the failed] institution is a party; (B) the performance of which the [FDIC], in [its] discretion, determines to be burdensome; and (C) the disaffirmance or repudiation of which the [FDIC] determines, in [its] discretion, will promote the orderly administration of the institution's affairs." 12 U.S.C. § 1821(e)(1); see also Nashville Lodging Co. v. Resolution Trust Corp., 59 F.3d 236, 241 (D.C.Cir.1995). Westberg v. FDIC, 741 F. 3d 1301 (DC Cir. 2014).
To maximize the FDIC's ability to fulfill its role as claim adjudicator, FIRREA "provides detailed procedures to allow the FDIC to consider certain claims against the receivership estate." Benson v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 673 F.3d 1207, 1211 (9th Cir.2012). The comprehensive claims process, see 12 U.S.C. § 1821(d)(3)-(10), allows the FDIC to "ensure that the assets of a failed institution are distributed fairly and promptly among those with valid claims against the institution, and to expeditiously wind up the affairs of failed banks," Benson, 673 F.3d at 1211 (internal quotation marks omitted), "'without unduly burdening the District Courts,'" Henderson, 986 F.2d at 320 (quoting H.R.Rep. No. 101-54(I), at 419 (1989), reprinted in 1989 U.S.C.C.A.N. 86, 215). Rundgren v. Washington Mut. Bank, FA, 760 F. 3d 1056 (9th Cir. 2014).
FIRREA strips courts of jurisdiction over claims that have not been exhausted through this process:
Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, no court shall have jurisdiction over —
(i) any claim or action for payment from, or any action seeking a determination of rights with respect to, the assets of any depository institution for which the [FDIC] has been appointed receiver, including assets which the [FDIC] may acquire from itself as such receiver; or
(ii) any claim relating to any act or omission of such institution or the [FDIC] as receiver.
Id. § 1821(d)(13)(D). Rundgren v. Washington Mut. Bank, FA, ibid.
THIS CASEBOOK contains a selection of 41 U. S. Court of Appeals decisions that analyze and interpret provisions of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989. The selection of decisions spans from 2008 to the date of publication.