top of page
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
average rating is 5 out of 5
average rating is 5 out of 5
I tried several civil bank fraud cases as outside counsel for FDIC/RTC in the early `90's before Judge Kent. At the very first hearing, he graciously informed me and all the defendants' attorneys that he did not believe in bank fraud or that it had caused all those institutions to fail, but rather felt that it was more a product of sloppy, fast-and-loose banking. He also expressed his dissatisfaction with all the litigation that had flooded his court coming from the FDIC, the identical complaint coming from every federal judge in Texas I practiced before. The morning the first trial started, with an FDIC in-house counsel present in the courtroom, he informed us that if we did not prove bank fraud he would sanction the FDIC until the foundations of its office in Washington, D.C. shook. He then gave us fifteen minutes to decide whether or not we wished to proceed with the trial. We proceeded and at its conclusion, Judge Kent admitted that there was indeed such a thing as bank fraud and then entered a non-dischargeable judgment of over $40 million dollars against the defendants, jointly and severally. If you prove your case in front of Judge Kent, you will win and the judgment will stand up on appeal.
7/15/19, 2:11 AM
Hon. Samuel B. Kent

Send reply to the comment poster:

note: comment poster will be able to reply directly to your email

bottom of page