IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/ijodag/v13y2016i3d10.1057_jdg.2016.1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

FDIC-R professional liability lawsuits: A call for uniformity

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua Nichols
  • Randall M Lending
  • Daniel O'Rourke
  • James M Kane
  • Daniel C McKay, II
  • Chad A Schiefelbein

Abstract

This article examines the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s (FDIC) efforts to pursue the former directors and officers of failed banks (the ‘Directors and Officers’) for damages. The FDIC, in its capacity as receiver of a failed bank, has the authority to pursue professionals that it believes acted tortiously and contributed to a bank’s losses. With over 500 US banks failing since February 2007, the FDIC has investigated and pursued many such professionals. This article focuses on: the unclear standards of liability to which one group of professionals – Directors and Officers – are held in these FDIC investigations and subsequent lawsuits, the disparate application of those standards by courts, and the negative consequences of the lack of a clear and uniform standard of liability for Directors and Officers. This article concludes that the creation of a uniform statutory gross negligence standard would allow the FDIC to effectively pursue the most culpable Directors and Officers, while eliminating the fear of liability for well-informed business decisions that has driven qualified Directors and Officers out of the banking industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua Nichols & Randall M Lending & Daniel O'Rourke & James M Kane & Daniel C McKay, II & Chad A Schiefelbein, 2016. "FDIC-R professional liability lawsuits: A call for uniformity," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 13(3), pages 204-220, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:ijodag:v:13:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1057_jdg.2016.1
    DOI: 10.1057/jdg.2016.1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/jdg.2016.1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/jdg.2016.1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:ijodag:v:13:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1057_jdg.2016.1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.