## IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________



### m 00-31272

_______________



## G ENERAL 

## F INANCIAL 

## S ERVICES


## , I NC


## .,

PlaintiffCounter ClaimantAppellant,

VERSUS



## J IMMY 

## C. T HOMPSON


## , ET AL


## .,

Defendants,



## N ORTH 

## A MERICAN 

## C ONSTRUCTORS


## , I NC


## .,

Counter DefendantAppellee.

_________________________



## N ORTH 

## A MERICAN 

## C ONSTRUCTORS


## , I NC


## .,

PlaintiffCounter DefendantAppellee,

VERSUS



## G ENERAL 

## F INANCIAL 

## S ERVICES


## , I NC


## .,

DefendantCounter ClaimantAppellant.2 

### _________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana

(98-CV-416)

_________________________ June 4, 2001

Before SMITH, DUHÉ, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *



### General Financial Services, Inc. (“General”), appeals a summary judgment declaring two mortgage s held by North
American Constructors, Inc. (“Constructors”) superior t o t hose assigned to General by the
Federal Deposi t Insurance Corporati on (“FDIC”). It is undisputed that General’s mortgages were originally registered before Constructors’s; in light, however, o f the
FDIC’s failure t imely to reinscribe the mortgages under L A



### . C IV



### . C ODE 

### A NN



### . art. 3369, 1 

### the court properly found that Louisiana
law effected a re-ranking of the mortgages.
See Alexander , 621 So. 2d at 31.

General argu es that provisions of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and
E nforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”),
codified in

pertinent part at 12 U.S.C. §§ 1821(d) (13)(C) and 1825(b), 2 

### exempt the

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has
determined that this opinion should not be published and i s not precedent except under the
limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R.
47.5.4.

1 Article 3369 was repealed in 1992. Because
it was in force at the time General’s mortgages were originally registered, however, it governs the reinscription requirements. S ec. Nat’l Trust v. Ale x ander

, 621 So. 2d 30, 31 (La. App. 2d Cir.),
writ denied , 629 So. 2d 30 (La. 1993). 2 Section 1821(d) ( 13)(C) states that, when the
FDIC is acting as receiver, “[n]o attachment or
execution may issue by any court upon assets in
the possession of the receiver”; § 1825(b) provides:

When acting as a receiver, the fol lowing provi sions shall apply with respect to the Corporation:

(1) Th e Corporation including its franchise, its capital, reserves, and surplus, and its income, sha ll be exempt from all taxation imposed by

any State, county, municipality, or
local taxing authority, except that any real property of the Corporation shall
be subject to State, territorial, county, municipal, or local taxation to the same
extent according to its value as other
real property is taxed, except that, notwithstanding the failure of any
person to challen ge an assessment under State law of su c h property's value, such value, and the tax thereon,
shall be determined as of the period for which such tax is imposed.

(2) No property of the Corporation shall
be subject to levy, attachment, (continued...)3



### FDIC 

### SS a n d General, as its assignee 

### SS from
Louisiana’s reinscription requirem ents and
thus prohibit Louisiana from re-ra nking the mortgages. As this court recently stated, however, § 1825(b) does not exempt the FDIC from Louisiana’s reinscription requirements:

FIRREA does not preclude the

a pplication of Louisiana reinscription
law to the FDIC’s property

. Nothing in
FIRRE A prevents Louisiana law from recognizing either the FDIC's obligation

to reinsc ribe mortgages or the loss of ranking suffered by the FDIC if it fails to meet this obligation.

FDIC v. McFarland

, 243 F.3d 876, 886 (5th
Cir. 2001). Moreover, even assuming § 1821- ( d)(13)(C) protects the FDIC from Louisiana’ s requirements, “no authority supports the proposition that section 1821(d)(13)(C) creates assignable rights.” Id. at 887 n.42.

We find no basis for distinguishing McFarland . The judgment is AFFIRMED.

2 (...continued)

garnishment, foreclosure , or sale without the consent of the Corporation, nor shall any involuntary lien at t ach to the property of the Corporation.

(3) The Corporation shall not be liable for

any amounts in the nature of penalties

or fines, including those arising from

t he failure of any person to pay any
real property, personal property, probate, or rec ording tax or any recording or filing fees when due.