Document Type

Case Summary

Publication Date


Case Synopsis

The Court determined that (1) 12 U.S.C. § 1821(d)(14)(A) (the “FDIC extender statute”)[1] preempts any similarly applicable state law, in this case NRS 40.4055(1)[2]; and (2) the Court refused to adopt a rule that a state statute of repose cannot be preempted by federal law.

[1] “Under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA),…the [FDIC] acts as a "conservator or receiver" for failed financial institutions. 12 U.S.C. § 1821(d)(2)(A) (2012). FIRREA extends

the time period for the FDIC, in its capacity as the failed institution's conservator or receiver, to bring a contract claim that has otherwise been barred by a state statutory time limitation:

[T]he applicable statute of limitations with regard to any action brought by [the FDIC] as conservator

or receiver shall be-

(i) in the case of any contract claim, the longer of—

(I) the 6-year period beginning on the date the claim accrues; or

(II) the period applicable under State law. 12 U.S.C. § 1821(d)(14)(A) (2012)”

[2] “Nevada provides for a shorter six-month time limitation for deficiency judgment actions under NRS 40.455(1), which states that

upon application of the judgment creditor or the beneficiary of the deed of trust within 6 months after the date of the foreclosure sale or the trustee's sale held pursuant to NRS 107.080, respectively, and after the required hearing, the court shall award a deficiency judgment to the judgment creditor or the beneficiary of the deed of trust. . .”