Wollmuth Maher & Deutsch LLP obtained a victory in the Central District of California on behalf of the FDIC as Receiver for Signature Bank (“FDIC-R”) in connection with a complaint filed after the failure of Signature Bank against Signature Bank and other individual defendants for various caused of action, including fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary dut. On August 2, 2023, the Firm moved to dismiss the complaint in its entirety based on, among other reasons, a lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”). In an Opinion and Order, dated September 28, 2023, the Court dismissed the action, ruling that the Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over the claims against both the FDIC-R and the other defendants. The Court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff sued before exhausting his administrative remedies under 12 U.S.C. § 1821 because neither a formal FDIC-R determination on the plaintiff’s claim nor the expiration of a 180-day statutory window to make this determination occurred. The Court made several rulings confirming the breadth of claims with respect to a failed bank that are subject to FIRREA’s claim process and found that “[l]itigants cannot avoid FIRREA's administrative requirements through strategic pleading.”

The case is captioned Cameron N. Verdi v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. et al., Case No. 8:23-cv-01206-JVS (KESx) (C.D. Cal).