Case Citator › North Mississippi Savings & Loan Association and New North Mississippi Federal Savings & Loan Association v. Joseph M. Hudspeth

North Mississippi Savings & Loan Association and New North Mississippi Federal Savings & Loan Association v. Joseph M. Hudspeth

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Overruled in part
Court
Fifth Circuit
Citation
756 F.2d 1096
Decided
Confirmed treatments
2
Flagged citations read
28 of 28
Citing cases (total)
28
Treatment dates
1987–1989
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. North Mississippi Savings & Loan Association v. Hudspeth was overruled in part. The Supreme Court rejected its rule requiring creditors to have their claims adjudicated by the FSLIC before going to court, while later courts continued to apply its separate removal holding.
More on how this was screened

All 28 flagged citations have been read; the two confirmed treatments are listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

28 later cases cite North Mississippi Savings & Loan Association and New North Mississippi Federal Savings & Loan Association v. Joseph M. Hudspeth; 28 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on North Mississippi Savings & Loan Association and New North Mississippi Federal Savings & Loan Association v. Joseph M. Hudspeth?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Overruled in part

  • The Supreme Court rejected Hudspeth's rule that the FSLIC had exclusive authority to adjudicate creditor claims and that creditors had to exhaust the existing administrative claims procedure before suing.

    Coit Independence Joint Venture v. Federal Savings & Loan Insurance Corp. · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    The Hudspeth court reasoned that judicial “resolution of even the facial merits of claims . . . would delay the receivership function of distribution of assets” and that “such a delay is a ‘restraint’ within the scope of the statute.” 756 F. 2d, at 1102. We disagree.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Declined to follow

  • The Texas Court of Appeals rejected Hudspeth's rule that a creditor's claim against an FSLIC receivership had to be adjudicated by the agency before a court could hear it.

    Summertree Venture III v. Federal Savings & Loan Insurance Corp. · Texas Court of Appeals, Fourteenth District · filed

    We conclude that we are not bound by the Hudspeth decision nor by the district court decisions following it. We will look independently at the statutes, regulations, and legislative history to determine the issue. ... We agree with the Ninth Circuit that the FSLIC does not have the power to adjudicate claims.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads North Mississippi Savings & Loan Association and New North Mississippi Federal Savings & Loan Association v. Joseph M. Hudspeth and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace