Opinion ID: 659417
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Do the alleged fraudulent misrepresentations fall within the exception to Sec. 1823(e)?

Text: 21 The limited partners argue that even if the alleged fraud constitutes an agreement, such an agreement falls within the exception to Sec. 1823(e) as the agreement was expressly included in the documents as approved by Guaranty Federal. We disagree. 22 We find no written agreement whereby the limited partners' duty to pay on the Partner Notes was conditioned on the truthfulness of the PPM or statements contained in the loan documents. To the contrary, the written agreements were unqualified. Thus, the limited partners seek to avoid enforcement of the Partner Notes based upon a secret condition to their obligation to pay. Such a position runs directly counter to Sec. 1823(e). See Langley v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., 484 U.S. at 91-92, 108 S.Ct. at 401. The limited partners' contention that the alleged fraudulent misrepresentations fall within the exception to Sec. 1823(e) is without merit. 23