Certain Underwriters At Lloyd's of London v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver of Omni National Bank, et al.

In O’Melveny & Myers v. FDIC, 512 U.S. 79 (1994), this Court stated that that the language of 12 U.S.C. § 1821(d)(2)(A)(i) “appears to indicate that the FDIC as receiver ‘steps into the shoes’” of the failed institution, and that “[i]t is hard to avoid the conclusion that § 1821(d)(2)(A)(i) places the FDIC in the shoes of the insolvent S&L.” Id. at 86-87. In the instant case, however, the district court concluded that it was unclear whether the FDIC as Receiver of Omni Bank was bringing claims “on behalf of” the bank such that coverage under the insurance policy issued by Petitioners was precluded by the insured versus insured policy exclusion. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed on the basis of the district court’s analysis. The question presented is: Whether claims of an insured depositary institution brought by the FDIC in its capacity as receiver of the insolvent institution constitute claims brought “by” or “on behalf of” the institution. (i)