Donald V. Watkins, Sr. v. United States

Whether a bank “insider” who acknowledged receiving tangible economic benefits from a $151,739.50 bank loan made to his business associate, committed bank fraud, within the meaning of Title 18 U.S.C. §§1344 and 2, in a case where: (a) the borrower (a cooperating government witness) never disclosed to the “insider” that the tangible economic benefits he received to satisfy a capital call obligation in a prior bona fide business relationship came from a loan made by the “insider’s” bank, and (b) the “insider” played no role in the bank’s lending decision, with respect to the $151,739.50 socalled "nominee" loan charged in Count Ten of the Indictment?

Whether a bank “insider” who acknowledged receiving tangible economic benefits from a $750,000 “nominee” bank loan made to his business associate, committed bank fraud, within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. §§1344 and 2, as a matter of law, in a case where: (a) 12 C.F.R. §215.3(f)(2) provided an express exception to Regulation O’s $100,000 cap1 on loans to the “insider,” who timely and properly invoked his right to the §215.3(f)(2) exception as an Regulation O, 12 C.F.R. §215.5