FDIC

He could spend the rest of his life behind bars.

Although lawyers have no control over when a bank will be in danger, they still have an ethical duty to safeguard their clients’ money.

The feds have been very careful not to call these bailouts.

Thomas Hoenig is crippled by debilitating belief that the president means anything he says.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Company has accused Bank of America of pulling the wool over regulators’ eyes in calculating a quarterly measure of complexity, saving the bank at least $1 billion in insurance payments since 2011.

Wells Fargo is failing tests like a hungover freshman who can’t even read.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC") has issued guidance in the form of "Frequently Asked Questions" for identifying, accepting, and reporting brokered deposits (the "Guidance"). While the Guidance is not intended to change any existing requirements or impose any new requirements on banks, the Guidance makes clear that the FDIC takes a very broad view of what is considered a brokered deposit.

Catchy blog titles are usually hard too, but not this one. Discovery of electronically stored information (“ESI”) is just plain difficult. If you are lucky, it does not come up in your case at all. Or, the parties agree that only certain emails during a certain period of time are relevant to the dispute. If you are unlucky, you might find yourself in the middle of a massive theft of trade secrets case involving customer lists with thousands of names and an email address for each one of them. At that point, expect to spend several months creating an ESI discovery protocol with your opposing counsel – a process of negotiating everything from search terms to custodian/device lists to hard drive/server copying formats, and so on and so forth. Once that part is finished, you still have to engage in discovery according to the protocol.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) reached a $16 million deal with a Utah bank recently, settling charges that the financial institution engaged in unfair and deceptive acts and practices. Merrick Bank violated Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Act in the marketing and servicing of its credit card add-on products, the regulator alleged. From 2008 to 2013, the bank touted its “PAYS Plan” as a payment protection card add-on product that provided a benefit payment toward a customer’s monthly credit card payment when triggered by life events such as involuntary unemployment, disability or hospitalization.

Significant Case Developments P.F. Chang’s Seeks Dismissal of Data Breach Class Actions, Arguing the Existence of an Express Contract and Lack of Damages Preclude Claims Lewert v. P.F. Chang’s China Bistro, Inc., No. 1:14-cv-04787 (N.D. Ill.). As we described in July and September, P.F. Chang’s was hit with three putative class actions following its announcement of a point-of-sale data breach. On August 29, P.F. Chang’s moved for dismissal of the first two cases, now consolidated in the Northern District of Illinois. In their complaints, plaintiffs John Lewert and Lucas Kosner alleged that by failing to safeguard customer information, P.F. Chang’s breached an implied contract and violated consumer protection laws. The plaintiffs did not bring a breach of express contract claim. P.F. Chang’s argues that the plaintiffs acknowledge the existence of an express contract by alleging that “a portion of the services [they] purchased” at P.F. Chang’s was “compliance with industry-standard measures” for data security and that they were “deprived of the full monetary value of [their] transaction.”