While at the Department of Justice, FDIC, and OCC, Jerry has been lead trial and appellate counsel in professional malpractice cases involving directors and officers of failed banks, accountants, lawyers, and doctors.
GRUBB V. UNITED STATES
Grubb v. United States, 887 F.2d 1230 (4th Cir. 1989) (argued for United States) (in a medical malpractice suit brought under the FTCA related to heart surgery that caused the death of a retired military officer, holding that a telephone call by a Naval officer to the deceased's spouse informing her that the Navy doctor […]
... [Read more...]
GRANT THORNTON, LLP V. OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY
Grant Thornton, LLP v. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 514 F.3d 1328 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (argued for OCC) (holding that an accounting firm was not subject to a cease-and-desist order or a CMP for accounting malpractice in failing to discover a massive fraud by a national bank in which half of its claimed […]
... [Read more...]
GRANT THORNTON, LLP V. FDIC
Grant Thornton, LLP v. FDIC, 435 Fed. Appx. 188 (4th Cir. 2011) (affirming an award of over $20 million to FDIC as receiver for the same bank against the same accounting firm based on accounting malpractice, favorably citing the observation of the concurring judge in the opinion of the District of Columbia Circuit that the […]
... [Read more...]
IN THE MATTER OF CARLOS LOUMIET, FORMER COUNSEL TO HAMILTON BANK, N.A.
In the matter of Carlos Loumiet, Former Counsel to Hamilton Bank, N.A. (Closed), Miami, Florida, Final Decision and Order, OCC-AA-EC-06-102 (July 27, 2009) (served as “decisional counsel,” 12 C.F.R. § 19.40(c)) (in rendering a final decision in connection with a recommendation by an administrative law judge (ALJ) against imposing a cease-and-desist order and civil money […]
... [Read more...]
ATHERTON V. FDIC
Atherton v. FDIC, 519 U.S. 213 (1997) (on brief for FDIC) (holding that a federal common-law rule providing for bank director-and-officer liability based upon simple negligence was displaced by the Erie Doctrine, but agreeing with FDIC that 12 U.S.C. § 1821(k) (i) displaces state law to the extent it requires proof of intentional misconduct and […]
... [Read more...]
FDIC V. O'MELVENY & MYERS
FDIC v. O'Melveny & Myers, 61 F.3d 17 (9th Cir. 1995) (argued for FDIC) (on remand from the Supreme Court, holding under California law that FDIC as receiver was not subject to equitable defenses that could have been raised by the bank's law firm in a legal malpractice suit filed by the bank before failure—including […]
... [Read more...]
O'MELVENY & MYERS V. FDIC
O'Melveny & Myers v. FDIC, 512 U.S. 79 (1994) (on brief for FDIC) (holding that, absent a special rule provided by Congress in FIRREA, FDIC, as receiver, stands in the shoes of a failed bank unless state receivership law provides it with greater rights and, therefore, declining to adopt a federal common-law rule providing that—even […]
... [Read more...]
FDIC V. MMAHAT
FDIC v. Mmahat, 907 F.2d 546 (5th Cir. 1990) (on brief for United States) (holding that (i) a bank's general counsel's debt was non-dischargeable on the basis of fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity, and (ii) a legal malpractice claim by FDIC was tolled under the Louisiana doctrine of adverse domination until […]
... [Read more...]
