United States v. Doke
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
171 F.3d 240 (1999)
- Written by Sharon Feldman, JD
Facts
Doke (defendant) was a real estate developer. Bass (defendant) was Doke’s attorney. Doke sold a property and retained an option to buy back parcels. Shortly before the expiration of the first option, Bass notified the buyer that Doke would exercise his option. Bass requested a loan from Champions Point National Bank (Champions) to buy the land. The land was sold to a Doke entity, which sold it to Bass at the same price. Doke gave Bass the money for the down payment and sent Bass the money for the loan payments. When Doke could no longer make payments, Bass asked Champions to restructure the loan without mentioning Doke. Champions ultimately foreclosed on the property. Doke and Bass were indicted for bank fraud. The government argued that Doke and Bass concealed Doke’s involvement in the loan, exposing Champions to the risk of violating banking regulations that limit the amount a bank can lend to a borrower. There was conflicting evidence at trial as to whether Bass concealed Doke’s involvement in the loan. Doke and Bass were convicted and argued on appeal that there was insufficient evidence at trial to show that Bass failed to disclose Doke’s involvement in the loan, and even if Bass did fail to disclose Doke’s involvement, Champions was not defrauded by the nominee loan because it knew Bass’s creditworthiness, what the loan proceeds would be used for, and what collateral secured the loan.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jones, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 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.