Marques v. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
286 F.3d 1014 (2002)
- Written by DeAnna Swearingen, LLM
Facts
Marques and others (plaintiffs) sued the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (the bank), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the shareholders of the federal reserve bank (defendants). The plaintiffs sought almost $100 billion on behalf of their principals, who held $25 billion in clearly fake bearer bonds issued by the bank in exchange for 1,665 metric tons of gold in 1934. The bank’s lawyer indicated the Department of Justice had decided not to take action, as “no one could possibly be deceived by such obvious nonsense.” The plaintiffs moved for voluntary dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 41(a)(1). The bank filed a FRCP 12(b)(6) motion the same day. The 12(b)(6) motion was accompanied by supporting materials, but the motion was not converted to a summary judgment motion until later. It is unclear whether the plaintiffs’ motion for voluntary dismissal or the bank’s 12(b)(6) motion was filed first. The plaintiffs claimed that the bank admitted in court that the dismissal was filed first, but the transcript was not part of the record on appeal. The district judge did not decide which document was filed first and instead concluded it did not matter, as the documents were filed the same day. The district court denied the plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss, and the plaintiffs appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Posner, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
