1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 872 F.Supp.
  5. 872 F.Supp. 1551 (1995)
 

RESOLUTION TRUST CORP. v. BRIGHT

Civ. A. No. 3-92-CV-0995-D.

872 F.Supp. 1551 (1995)

RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION, in its Corporate Capacity, Plaintiff, v. H.R. "Bum" BRIGHT, Individually and as Predecessor Trustee for, and Clay Van Ness Bright as Successor Trustee for, Martha Carol Bright Reeder Trust, Margaret Louise Bright Petty Trust, Christopher Roberts Bright Trust; H.R. Bright as Predecessor Trustee for, and Christopher Roberts Bright as Successor Trustee for Clay Van Ness Bright Trust; James B. "Boots" Reeder; Robert B. Payne, Individually and as Predecessor Trustee for, and Clay Van Ness Bright as Successor Trustee for William Christopher Reeder Trust, Bryan Taliaferro Reeder Trust, Caroline Bright Reeder Trust, Nathan Bright Petty Trust, Margaret Louise Petty Trust, Elizabeth Carrie Petty Trust, Bradford Clay Petty Trust, and Christopher Roberts Bright Children Trust; and Robert B. Payne as Predecessor Trustee for, and Christopher Roberts Bright as Successor Trustee for Stuart Harvey Bright Trust, Justin Clay Bright Trust, and Parker Madison Bright Trust, Defendants.

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division.

January 10, 1995.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Stewart R. Werner (argued) and Johnny K. Merritt of Mullin Hoard & Brown, L.L.P., Amarillo, TX, Victor L. Roy, III and Kyle M. Keegan of Roy, Kiesel, Aaron & Tucker, Baton Rouge, LA, Richard M. Lannen, Diane Snelson, and Janice Parker of Lannen & Oliver, P.C., Dallas, TX, and Carolyn Pratt Perry of Resolution Trust Corp., Washington, DC, for plaintiff.

Ernest E. Figari, Jr., A. Erin Dwyer (argued), and Donald Colleluori of Figari & Davenport, L.L.P., and Rosemary Stewart of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, Dallas, TX, for defendants H.R. Bright and James B. Reeder.

Robert H. Mow, Jr. and Alec Bramlett of Hughes & Luce, L.L.P., Dallas, TX, for Robert B. Payne.

FITZWATER, District Judge:

When an agency of the United States becomes the conservator of a failed financial institution and sues directors and officers for causing damage to the institution, the agency must occasionally rely on tolling doctrines to avoid limitations periods that expired before its appointment as conservator. The limitations periods and, in turn, the tolling doctrines are typically governed by state law, thus obligating federal courts to comprehend...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases