Jerry has played a significant role in two lead cases decided by the Supreme Court addressing the circumstances under which Congress has waived the sovereign immunity of the United States or one of its federal agencies. In the first case, he was lead trial and appellate counsel in a dispute eventually decided by the Supreme Court that delimited the circumstances under which the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) retains the Government's sovereign immunity when regulating the day-to-day activities of banks in troubled condition. In the other, Jerry was FDIC's lead counsel assisting the Solicitor General in briefing and arguing the extent to which a federal agency's sue-and-be-sued clause waives the government's sovereign immunity and how it interfaces with the FTCA's limited waiver of sovereign immunity.
GAUBERT V. UNITED STATES
Gaubert v. United States (885 F.2d 1284 (5th Cir. 1989) (argued for United States) (where a former bank owner sued for millions of dollars in damages alleging that its federal regulator's negligent day-to-day control of his troubled bank caused its failure, affirming in part and reversing in part the dismissal of the claim, holding that […]
... [Read more...]
GAUBERT V. UNITED STATES
Gaubert v. United States (N.D. Tex. 1988) (lead counsel for United States) (where a former bank owner sued for millions of dollars in damages alleging that its federal regulator's negligent day-to-day control of the troubled bank caused its failure, dismissed based upon the discretionary function exception of the FTCA because the decisions were based upon […]
... [Read more...]
FDIC V. MEYER
FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471 (1994) (on briefs for FDIC) (holding that (i) only federal employees—not federal agencies—can be sued under a federal cause of action for tort damages in connection with the violation of a person's constitutional rights, and (ii) a suit against the United States under the FTCA is the exclusive remedy […]
... [Read more...]
UNITED STATES V. GAUBERT
United States v. Gaubert, 499 U.S. 315 (1991) (on brief for United States) (where a former bank owner sued for millions of dollars in damages alleging that the bank its federal regulator's negligent day-to-day control of his troubled bank caused its failure, reversing the Fifth Circuit's decision and holding that the discretionary function exception of […]
... [Read more...]
