2 The Bankruptcy System
|
|
- Spencer Richard
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 2 The Bankruptcy System 2.01 THE BANKRUPTCY COURT 2.01(a) Introduction The bankruptcy court system enacted by the Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judgeship Act of 1984 ( BAFJA ), Pub. L. No , 98 Stat. 333, is a mixture of compromises and a product of its tortuous history. Before 1978, bankruptcy courts were staffed by referees, renamed bankruptcy judges by the 1973 Bankruptcy Rules, who were appointed by the district courts for 6-year terms. Although the powers and jurisdiction of bankruptcy judges had grown over the 80-year history from their establishment under the Bankruptcy Act of 1898, their jurisdiction continued to be limited by outmoded concepts of possession of property of the estate and consent to jurisdiction by the adverse party, and their powers and status were limited by their roles as subordinate functionaries of the district courts. The 1978 Bankruptcy Reform Act attempted to upgrade the jurisdiction, powers, and status of bankruptcy judges. It did not, however, adopt the approach of the original House Bill, H.R. 8200, which would have established Article III bankruptcy courts 1 with judges who enjoyed the full powers of a federal court of original jurisdiction. Nevertheless, the 1978 Act went a long way toward achieving the goal of improving the bankruptcy system. It created bankruptcy courts, nominally referred to as adjuncts of the district courts but in fact virtually independent of them.the concept of adjunct was never defined or explained, but in form the Act conferred the bankruptcy jurisdiction in the first instance on the district courts, former 28 U.S.C. 1471(a), (b), 1 Article III of the Constitution vests the judicial Power of the United States in courts whose judges are appointed to serve during good behavior, sometimes referred to as life tenure, and are to be protected against salary reduction. Since the 1978 Act provided 14-year terms rather than life tenure for the bankruptcy judges, they were not Article III judges. 27
2 28 Fundamentals of Bankruptcy Law
3 2.01(a) The Bankruptcy System 29 and then provided that all this jurisdiction shall be exercised by the bankruptcy courts. Former section 1471(c). The judges were to be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to serve for 14-year terms and were given broad powers. The former limitations on the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy judges were mostly eliminated. Bankruptcy judges were able to hear all Title 11 cases and all proceedings arising under title 11 or arising in or related to cases under title 11. Former 28 U.S.C. 1471(b). The bankruptcy judges had plenary powers, except that they could not punish a criminal contempt not committed in the presence of the court and could not enjoin another court. The bankruptcy courts could hold jury trials and could issue final judgments, including in personam judgments, in any proceeding within their jurisdiction. To give Congress time to determine the number of new judges that would be required and the President and Senate the opportunity to complete the appointments process, a five-year transition period was to precede implementation of the new court system. In the meantime, former bankruptcy judges were continued in office for the transition period and were immediately given the broad jurisdiction and powers of the new court. The system appeared to be working very well until it encountered an obstacle that was not altogether unexpected. In the legislative debates leading to the enactment of the 1978 Act, the House Judiciary Committee had argued, and the House of Representatives had apparently agreed, that the broad new powers and jurisdiction given to the bankruptcy courts could be exercised only by judges who enjoyed Article III protections. Although the Senate acknowledged that the broader powers and jurisdiction were critical to improving the bankruptcy system, it could not be persuaded of the need to provide Article III protections for the judges who exercised those powers. As a result, the 1978 legislation compromised the system and created non-article III courts. Thus the issue of the constitutional propriety of the 1978 court system was framed. As noted in Chapter 1, the Supreme Court in June 1982 rendered its decision in Northern Pipeline Constr. Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co., 458 U.S. 50 (1982), which invalidated the entire grant of jurisdiction to the bankruptcy courts.the Court s decision did not produce a majority opinion, and therein lay much of the uncertainty concerning its effect. Mr. Justice Brennan, writing for a plurality of four Justices, ruled broadly that the creation of non- Article III bankruptcy courts to handle the wide range of matters comprehended by the jurisdictional provisions of the 1978 Bankruptcy Reform Act could not come within any of the previously permitted exceptions, including the public rights exception, to the requirement that the federal judiciary be
4 30 Fundamentals of Bankruptcy Law
5 2.01(a) The Bankruptcy System 31 tenured during good Behaviour under Article III, section 1, of the Constitution. Because, under the statutory scheme, the bankruptcy courts were quite independent of the Article III district courts, the so-called adjunct relationship between them did not overcome the constitutional defect. Mr. Justice Brennan then concluded that the jurisdictional grant was not severable, or more properly, not divisible, since Congress intended a unified system of bankruptcy jurisdiction. Consequently, even though the plurality opinion recognized that certain aspects of the bankruptcy jurisdiction might constitutionally be exercised by nontenured judges, it invalidated the entire grant of jurisdiction to the non-article III bankruptcy courts, not merely the portion that was beyond the capability of nontenured judges. Mr. Justice Rehnquist, writing for himself and Mme. Justice O Connor, concurred on the narrower ground that the trial of the Marathon contract dispute action, brought by the debtor in possession against a defendant who had no other connection with the bankruptcy case, was the kind of traditional common law suit that, in the federal judiciary, could be brought only in an Article III court with tenured judges. While limiting his concurrence to the specific kind of lawsuit involved in Marathon, he agreed with the plurality that Congress intended the jurisdictional grant to be nonseverable and therefore concurred in the judgment invalidating the grant in its entirety. Three dissenting Justices, namely, the Chief Justice and Justices White and Powell, would have upheld the constitutionality of the jurisdictional grant. But in a somewhat unusual action, the Chief Justice wrote an additional separate dissent, attempting to suggest the narrow limits of the Marathon holding and what Congress could do to overcome the problem. He suggested that Congress provide for a rerouting of traditional common law matters to the federal district courts, leaving everything else within the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy courts. Mr. Justice Brennan s opinion took sharp issue with the Chief Justice s characterization of the plurality s position and with his suggestion concerning congressional reformulation of the bankruptcy court s jurisdiction, but Mr. Justice Rehnquist s opinion did not. Thus any broad effect of the case is uncertain at best. Technically, however, the Chief Justice seems correct in his view that the holding is limited to the precise kind of lawsuit involved in the Marathon case. 2 Moreover, his suggestion for refor- 2 In the subsequent decision in Thomas v. Union Carbide Agr. Prods. Co., 473 U.S. 568, 584 (1985), five Justices joined an opinion that emphasized this narrow limitation: The Court s holding in that [Marathon] case establishes only that Congress may not vest in a non-article III court the power to adjudicate, render final judgment, and issue binding orders in a traditional contract action arising under state law, without consent of the litigants, and subject only to ordinary appellate review.
In The Supreme Court of the United States
No. 13-935 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- WELLNESS INTERNATIONAL
More informationToward a Theory of Public Rights: Article III and the Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judgeship Act of 1984
Nebraska Law Review Volume 70 Issue 3 Article 7 1991 Toward a Theory of Public Rights: Article III and the Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judgeship Act of 1984 Jeffrey H. Bush University of Nebraska
More informationTHE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44: i
FROM ORPHAN TO MATURITY: THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BANKRUPTCY SYSTEM DURING L. RALPH MECHAM'S TENURE AS DIRECTOR OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS LLOYD D. GEORGE* TABLE OF CONTENTS
More informationLitigant Consent: The Missing Link for Permissible Jurisdiction for Final Judgment in Non-Article III Courts after Stern v.
Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law Volume 20 Issue 4 Article 8 2012 Litigant Consent: The Missing Link for Permissible Jurisdiction for Final Judgment in Non-Article III Courts after Stern v. Marshall
More informationChapter 18 The Judicial Branch
Chapter 18 The Judicial Branch Creation of a National Judiciary The Framers created the national judiciary in Article III of the Constitution. There are two court systems in the United States: the national
More informationBANKRUPTCY AND THE SUPREME COURT by Kenneth N. Klee (LexisNexis 2009)
BANKRUPTCY AND THE SUPREME COURT by Kenneth N. Klee (LexisNexis 2009) Excerpt from Chapter 6, pages 439 46 LANDMARK CASES The Supreme Court cases of the past 111 years range in importance from relatively
More informationNotes on a Venture to the Supreme Court: Thomas Linde and Denice Moewes Share their Experiences on In Re: Bellingham Insurance Agency
Notes on a Venture to the Supreme Court: Thomas Linde and Denice Moewes Share their Experiences on In Re: Bellingham Insurance Agency King County Bar Association, 1200 Fifth Avenue, Suite 700, Seattle
More informationStern v. Marshall Digging for Gold and Shaking the Foundation of Bankruptcy Courts (or Not)
Louisiana Law Review Volume 72 Number 3 Spring 2012 Stern v. Marshall Digging for Gold and Shaking the Foundation of Bankruptcy Courts (or Not) Katie Drell Grissel Repository Citation Katie Drell Grissel,
More informationTHE SPECIAL COUNSEL IS AN INFERIOR OFFICER
April 24, 2018 The Honorable Charles Grassley Chairman U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary Washington, DC 20510-6275 The Honorable Dianne Feinstein Ranking Member U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary
More informationCHAPTER 3: JURISDICTION, PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATION
CHAPTER 3: JURISDICTION, PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATION INTRODUCTION Since the inception of a comprehensive bankruptcy system in the United States nearly a hundred years ago, there has been a constant search
More informationBankruptcy. Louisiana Law Review. Joseph E. Conley Jr. Volume 43 Number 2 Developments in the Law, : A Symposium November 1982
Louisiana Law Review Volume 43 Number 2 Developments in the Law, 1981-1982: A Symposium November 1982 Bankruptcy Joseph E. Conley Jr. Repository Citation Joseph E. Conley Jr., Bankruptcy, 43 La. L. Rev.
More informationLatham & Watkins Litigation and Finance Departments. Supreme Court Limits Reach of Non-Article III Courts Jurisdiction
Number 1210 July 5, 2011 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Litigation and Finance Departments Supreme Court Limits Reach of Non-Article III Courts Jurisdiction Under Article III, the judicial power of the
More informationPolitical Science 417. Judicial Structure. Article III. Judicial Structure January 22, Structural "Imperatives" ("subcultures") Legal Imperative
Political Science 417 Judicial Structure Structural "Imperatives" ("subcultures") Legal Imperative Democratic Imperative Administrative Imperative Article III SECTION 1 The judicial Power of the Unites
More informationJurisdictional Uncertainties Complicate Debtor Class Actions In Bankruptcy Court
Reprinted with permission from the [August 19, 2013] issue of the New York Law Journal. 2013 ALM Media Properties, LLC. Further duplication without permission is prohibited. All rights reserved. New York
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 564 U. S. (2011) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 10 179 HOWARD K. STERN, EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF VICKIE LYNN MARSHALL, PETITIONER v. ELAINE T. MARSHALL, EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF E.
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 10-179 In the Supreme Court of the United States HOWARD K. STERN, EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF VICKIE LYNN MARSHALL, PETITIONER v. ELAINE T. MARSHALL, EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF E. PIERCE MARSHALL ON
More information. The Boundaries of Article III: Delegation of Final Decisionmaking Authority to Magistrates
. The Boundaries of Article III: Delegation of Final Decisionmaking Authority to Magistrates In the last decade Congress has steadily expanded the adjudicatory role of magistrates in federal district courts.
More informationMagruder s American Government
Presentation Pro Magruder s American Government C H A P T E R 18 The Federal Court System 2001 by Prentice Hall, Inc. C H A P T E R 18 The Federal Court System SECTION 1 The National Judiciary SECTION
More informationCommodity Futures Trading Commission v. Schor: Article III Finds a Home on the Slippery Slope
Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School Digital Commons at Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review Law Reviews 1-1-1988 Commodity Futures Trading Commission
More informationThe Federal Courts. Chapter 16
The Federal Courts Chapter 16 The Nature of the Judicial Introduction: Two types of cases: System Criminal Law: The government charges an individual with violating one or more specific laws. Civil Law:
More informationCivil vs Criminal Cases
Chapter Objectives Describe the state court system and its politics Analyze sources and consequences of the power of the federal judiciary and compare/contrast approaches to constitutional interpretation
More informationThe 1984 Bankruptcy Amendments-Another Flawed Compromise
The 1984 Bankruptcy Amendments-Another Flawed Compromise I. INTRODUCTION In June of 1984 Congress enacted the Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judgeship Act of 1984 ("Amendments").' The Amendments were
More informationThe Bankruptcy Act of 1984: Marathon Revisited
Volume 3 Issue 1 Yale Law & Policy Review Article 13 1984 The Bankruptcy Act of 1984: Marathon Revisited Wendy Lynn Trugman Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/ylpr
More informationAnalysis of Decision by the United States Supreme Court in Wellness International Network, Ltd. v. Sharif, U.S. (May 26, 2015) 1
Analysis of Decision by the United States Supreme Court in Wellness International Network, Ltd. v. Sharif, U.S. (May 26, 2015) 1 Judith Greenstone Miller Paul R. Hage 2015 All Rights Reserved Jaffe Raitt
More informationNOTE-THE QUESTIONABLE CONSTrTUTIONALrrY OF ARTICLE I BANKRuircY COURTS INTRODUCTION
NOTE-THE QUESTIONABLE CONSTrTUTIONALrrY OF ARTICLE I BANKRuircY COURTS INTRODUCTION Article I of the Constitution seems to mandate that Congress staff the courts of the United States with judges for life
More informationBANKRUPTCY COURTS AUTHORITY UNDER 505
BANKRUPTCY COURTS AUTHORITY UNDER 505 ABSTRACT [T]he court may determine the amount or legality of any tax, any fine or penalty relating to a tax, or any addition to tax.... 1 Surprisingly, this provision
More informationSupreme Court Rules on Bankruptcy Courts Authority, Leaves Key Question Unanswered
Westlaw Journal bankruptcy Litigation News and Analysis Legislation Regulation Expert Commentary VOLUME 11, issue 7 / july 31, 2014 Expert Analysis Supreme Court Rules on Bankruptcy Courts Authority, Leaves
More informationThe Federal Judiciary (HAA)
The Federal Judiciary (HAA) At fewer than 500 words, Article III of the Constitution, which spells out the powers of the nation s judicial branch, is remarkably brief. The framers brevity on this topic
More informationChapter 6 Study Guide
Chapter 6 Study Guide Question 1 2.5 / 2.5 points An example of a limited-jurisdiction trial court is: A) Juvenile court. B) Probate court. C) Both of the above. Question 2 All of the following courts
More informationCOMPILATION OF BACKGROUND HISTORY AND INFORMATION U.S. FEDERAL DEFENDER PROGRAM December 2005
I. GUIDING PRINCIPLES COMPILATION OF BACKGROUND HISTORY AND INFORMATION U.S. FEDERAL DEFENDER PROGRAM December 2005 The right to the effective assistance of counsel is a constitutionally mandated, critical
More informationChapter 11 and 12 - The Federal Court System
Chapter 11 and 12 - The Federal Court System SSCG16 The student will demonstrate knowledge of the operation of the federal judiciary. Powers of the Federal Courts Federal courts are generally created by
More informationThe United States Supreme Court
The United States Supreme Court Highest court in the land and the ONLY one established by Article III of U.S. Constitution. Term: First Monday October- late June Nine Justices: one Chief, eight associate
More informationCongressional Power to Create Federal Courts: A Legal Overview
Congressional Power to Create Federal Courts: A Legal Overview Andrew Nolan Legislative Attorney Richard M. Thompson II Legislative Attorney October 1, 2014 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov
More informationThe Courts. Chapter 15
The Courts Chapter 15 The Nature of the Judicial System Introduction: Two types of cases: Criminal Law: The government charges an individual with violating one or more specific laws. Civil Law: The court
More informationDEFINING THE CLOSE NEXUS: AN ANALYSIS OF A BANKRUPTCY COURT S CHAPTER 11 POSTCONFIRMATION JURISDICTION
DEFINING THE CLOSE NEXUS: AN ANALYSIS OF A BANKRUPTCY COURT S CHAPTER 11 POSTCONFIRMATION JURISDICTION INTRODUCTION Ever since the Supreme Court held in Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe
More informationLegislation Authorizing the Transfer of Federal Judges from One District to Another
Legislation Authorizing the Transfer of Federal Judges from One District to Another C ongress m ay by statute confer new duties on officers o f the U nited States as long as those new duties are "g erm
More informationIntroduction And Overview
1 Introduction And Overview 1.01 THE NEED FOR REVISION OF BANKRUPTCY LAWS IN 1978 The present bankruptcy laws are, for the most part, the result of legislation originally passed by Congress in 1978 with
More informationStern v. Marshall: A Legal and Personal Overview
Stern v. Marshall: A Legal and Personal Overview By Kent L. Richland 5900 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th Floor Los Angeles, California 90036 (310) 859-7811 / Fax: (310) 276-5261 Stern v. Marshall: A Legal and
More informationFrom Stem to Stern: Navigating Bankruptcy Practice after Stern v. Marshall
Missouri Law Review Volume 77 Issue 4 Article 6 Fall 2012 From Stem to Stern: Navigating Bankruptcy Practice after Stern v. Marshall Michelle Wright Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/mlr
More informationAP Gov Chapter 15 Outline
Law in the United States is based primarily on the English legal system because of our colonial heritage. Once the colonies became independent from England, they did not establish a new legal system. With
More informationCHAPTER 9. The Judiciary
CHAPTER 9 The Judiciary The Nature of the Judicial System Introduction: Two types of cases: Criminal Law: The government charges an individual with violating one or more specific laws. Civil Law: The court
More informationJudicial Power and the Administrative State
Louisiana Law Review Volume 62 Number 1 Fall 2001 Judicial Power and the Administrative State James L. Dennis Repository Citation James L. Dennis, Judicial Power and the Administrative State, 62 La. L.
More informationSupreme Court Holds that SEC Administrative Law Judges Are Unconstitutionally Appointed
Supreme Court Holds that SEC Administrative Law Judges Are Unconstitutionally Appointed June 26, 2018 On June 21, 2018, the Supreme Court ruled in Lucia v. SEC 1 that Securities and Exchange Commission
More informationV. JURISDICTION AND AUTHORITY OF THE BANKRUPTCY COURT
V. JURISDICTION AND AUTHORITY OF THE BANKRUPTCY COURT As originally enacted, the Code gave bankruptcy courts pervasive jurisdiction, despite the fact that bankruptcy judges do not enjoy the protections
More informationCHAPTER 18:1: Jurisdiction and the Courts
CHAPTER 18:1: Jurisdiction and the Courts Chapter 18:1 o We will examine the reasons why the national court system was established. o We will determine the two bases upon which federal courts hear and
More informationINTRODUCTION THE NATURE OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM
Trace the historical evolution of the policy agenda of the Supreme Court. Examine the ways in which American courts are both democratic and undemocratic institutions. CHAPTER OVERVIEW INTRODUCTION Although
More information4 General Statutory Waivers Of Sovereign Immunity
4 General Statutory Waivers Of Sovereign Immunity 4.01 CATEGORIZATION OF STATUTORY WAIVERS OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY: SPECIFIC AND GENERAL As discussed at the beginning of Chapter 3, 1 this treatise divides
More informationThe Jurisprudence of Justice John Paul Stevens: Selected Opinions on the Jury s Role in Criminal Sentencing
The Jurisprudence of Justice John Paul Stevens: Selected Opinions on the Jury s Role in Criminal Sentencing Anna C. Henning Legislative Attorney June 7, 2010 Congressional Research Service CRS Report for
More informationPatterson, Chapter 14. The Federal Judicial System Applying the Law. Chapter Quiz
Patterson, Chapter 14 The Federal Judicial System Applying the Law Chapter Quiz 1. Federal judges are a) nominated by the Senate and approved by both houses of Congress. b) nominated by the president and
More informationYou know the legislative branch
You know the legislative branch and the executive branch but you don t know The Judicial Branch!!! Laws are a dead letter without courts to expound and define their true meaning and operation Alexander
More informationEquitable Mootness in Bankruptcy Appeals
Santa Clara Law Review Volume 49 Number 1 Article 6 1-1-2009 Equitable Mootness in Bankruptcy Appeals Katelyn Knight Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/lawreview Part
More informationSTATE LAW CLAIMS AND ARTICLE III IN Stern v. Marshall, 131 S. CT (2011)
STATE LAW CLAIMS AND ARTICLE III IN Stern v. Marshall, 131 S. CT. 2594 (2011) Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution vests the judicial Power of the United States in courts whose judges shall hold
More informationA Comment About a Separate Bankruptcy System
Fordham Law Review Volume 64 Issue 6 Article 2 1996 A Comment About a Separate Bankruptcy System Carl Felsenfeld Fordham University School of Law Recommended Citation Carl Felsenfeld, A Comment About a
More informationUnderstanding the U.S. Supreme Court
Understanding the U.S. Supreme Court Processing Supreme Court Cases Supreme Court Decision Making The Role of Law and Legal Principles Supreme Court Decision Making The Role of Politics Conducting Research
More informationCase 5:16-cv gwc Document 10 Filed 12/18/17 Page 1 of 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF VERMONT
Case 5:16-cv-00256-gwc Document 10 Filed 12/18/17 Page 1 of 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF VERMONT PHH MORTGAGE CORPORATION, Appellant, v. JAN M. SENSENICH, Chapter 13 Trustee, ALLEN
More informationRESPONDING TO STERN V. MARSHALL
RESPONDING TO STERN V. MARSHALL ABSTRACT Stern v. Marshall is the most recent decision in a series of cases decided by the Supreme Court that involves the doctrine of public rights. The Court found that
More informationSupremacy Clause Issues in the Independent Living Center Litigation
Supremacy Clause Issues in the Independent Living Center Litigation Stephen S. Schwartz Kirkland & Ellis LLP Washington, DC I. Introduction. A. This presentation is not intended to address Medicaid-specific
More informationJury Trials in Bankruptcy Court? The Seventh Circuit Adds Its Voice to the Debate in In Re Grabill Corp.
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal Volume 25 Issue 1 Fall 1993 Article 6 1993 Jury Trials in Bankruptcy Court? The Seventh Circuit Adds Its Voice to the Debate in In Re Grabill Corp. Amy Field Herzog
More informationGreasing the Squeaky Wheels of Justice: Designing the Bankruptcy Courts of the Twenty-First Century
Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law Volume 14 Issue 1 Article 3 5-1-1999 Greasing the Squeaky Wheels of Justice: Designing the Bankruptcy Courts of the Twenty-First Century Christopher F. Carlton
More informationNON-ARTICLE III ADJUDICATION: BANKRUPTCY AND NONBANKRUPTCY, WITH AND WITHOUT LITIGANT CONSENT
NON-ARTICLE III ADJUDICATION: BANKRUPTCY AND NONBANKRUPTCY, WITH AND WITHOUT LITIGANT CONSENT Ralph Brubaker INTRODUCTION... 13 I. THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF NON-ARTICLE III CONSENT ADJUDICATIONS BANKRUPTCY
More informationDirections: Read each of the questions or statements below, then choose the correct answer from those provided.
Pre Test: Organization of the Federal Courts Name: Directions: Read each of the questions or statements below, then choose the correct answer from those provided. 1. Name the system of government in which
More informationParental Notification of Abortion
This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp October 1990 ~ H0 USE
More informationOn Hunting Elephants in Mouseholes
On Hunting Elephants in Mouseholes Harold H. Bruff Should the Supreme Court take the occasion of deciding a relatively minor case involving the constitutionality of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
More informationlaws created by legislative bodies.
THE AP AMERICAN GOVERNMENT STUDY GUIDE CLASSIFICATION OF LEGAL ISSUES TYPE OF CASE CIVIL CASES CRIMINAL CASES covers issues of claims, suits, contracts, and licenses. covers illegal actions or wrongful
More informationAre Bankruptcy Judges Unconstitutional - An Appointments Clause Challenge
Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law From the SelectedWorks of Tuan Samahon 2008 Are Bankruptcy Judges Unconstitutional - An Appointments Clause Challenge Tuan Samahon, Villanova University
More informationStern v. Marshall: The Constitutional Limits of Bankruptcy Jurisdiction, Redux. Dhrumil Patel 1
Stern v. Marshall: The Constitutional Limits of Bankruptcy Jurisdiction, Redux Dhrumil Patel 1 In January of this year, the Supreme Court will consider the scope of bankruptcy jurisdiction in place since
More informationArticle III, the Foreign Relations Power, and the Binational Panel System of NAFTA
Berkeley Journal of International Law Volume 13 Issue 2 Article 1 1996 Article III, the Foreign Relations Power, and the Binational Panel System of NAFTA Ethan Boyer Recommended Citation Ethan Boyer, Article
More informationConsent, Coercion, and Bankruptcy Administration
Journal of Business & Technology Law Volume 11 Issue 1 Article 3 Consent, Coercion, and Bankruptcy Administration S. Todd Brown Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/jbtl
More informationBANKRUPTCY JUDGES AND THE INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY*
BANKRUPTCY JUDGES AND THE INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY* DAVID P. CURRIE** Among the powers conferred upon Congress by article I of the United States Constitution is the authority to "establish... uniform Laws
More informationIN RE: The Guild and Gallery Plus, Inc. v. Maggio
1996 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 1-4-1996 IN RE: The Guild and Gallery Plus, Inc. v. Maggio Precedential or Non-Precedential: Docket 95-5295 Follow this
More informationBankruptcy Authority Post Stern, Bellingham and Wellness: Navigating the Uncertainties in Claims Litigation
Presenting a live 90-minute webinar with interactive Q&A Bankruptcy Authority Post Stern, Bellingham and Wellness: Navigating the Uncertainties in Claims Litigation THURSDAY, JULY 9, 2015 1pm Eastern 12pm
More informationMEMORANDUM. The issue is whether the small-dollar home court venue exception in 28 U.S.C.
Dated: 09/02/11 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE In re: NUKOTE INTERNATIONAL, INC., Debtor. Case No. 3:09-06240 Chapter 11 Hon. Keith M. Lundin N1 CREDITORS TRUST, Plaintiff,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
(Bench Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2003 1 NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes
More informationThe Appellate Courts Role in the Federal Judicial System 1
The Appellate Courts Role in the Federal Judicial System 1 Anne Marie Lofaso * A. Introduction 2 B. Federal Judicial System 3 1. An independent judiciary 3 2. Role of appellate courts: To correct errors,
More informationEDMOND v. UNITED STATES. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the armed forces
OCTOBER TERM, 1996 651 Syllabus EDMOND v. UNITED STATES certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the armed forces No. 96 262. Argued February 24, 1997 Decided May 19, 1997* The Coast Guard
More informationSupreme Court and Appellate Alert
Supreme Court and Appellate Alert July 6, 2016 Supreme Court 2015 Term in Review: Indian Law Cases Overview In an unusually active term for Indian law issues, the Supreme Court heard three major cases
More information28 USC 631. NB: This unofficial compilation of the U.S. Code is current as of Jan. 4, 2012 (see
TITLE 28 - JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE PART III - COURT OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES CHAPTER 43 - UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGES 631. Appointment and tenure (a) The judges of each United States district
More informationCHAPTER THIRTEEN DECIDING THE MERITS OF THE CLAIM
CHAPTER THIRTEEN DECIDING THE MERITS OF THE CLAIM This chapter discusses the various components of the AEDPA deference statute, including... The meaning of the term merits adjudication, The clearly established
More informationCRS Report for Congress
CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Order Code RS22122 April 15, 2005 Administrative Subpoenas and National Security Letters in Criminal and Intelligence Investigations: A Sketch Summary
More informationWarm Up: Review Activity Declare your Powers
Mr. Cegielski S E C T I O N 1 The National Judiciary ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS: Why did the Constitution create a national judiciary? What is the structure of the national judiciary? What criteria are used to
More informationBrooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law
Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law Volume 11 Issue 1 SYMPOSIUM: The Role of Technology in Compliance in Financial Services: An Indispensable Tool as well as a Threat? Article 9 12-1-2016
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION HONORABLE JOHN CONYERS, JR., et al., Plaintiffs ) Civil Action 2:06-CV- 11972 ) Judge Edmunds v. ) ) GEORGE W.
More informationU.S. Supreme Court 1998 Line Item Veto Act is Unconstitutional - Order Code A August 18, 1998
U.S. Supreme Court 1998 Line Item Veto Act is Unconstitutional - Order Code 98-690A August 18, 1998 Congressional Research Service The Library of Congress - Line Item Veto Act Unconstitutional: Clinton
More informationLesson Plan Title Here
Lesson Plan Title Here Created By: Samantha DeCerbo and Alvalene Rogers Subject / Lesson: Constitutional Interpretation and Roper v. Simmons Grade Level: 9-12th grade(s) Overview/Description: Methods of
More informationPossible Judiciary FRQs
Name: Class Period: Possible Judiciary FRQs Essay 1 Compare and contrast civil and criminal law 2 Define and discuss the principle of stare decisis 1 Name: 3 Compare and contrast original and appellate
More informationPatent Procedures Amendment Act of 2016
Patent Procedures Amendment Act of 2016 Harold C. Wegner * Foreword, Lessons from Japan 2 The Proposed Legislation 4 Sec. 1. Short Title; Table Of Contents 5 Sec. 101. Reissue Proceedings. 5 Sec. 102.
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 541 U. S. (2004) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of
More informationFollow this and additional works at: Part of the Law Commons
Chicago-Kent Law Review Volume 59 Issue 3 Article 5 June 1983 Llimits on Legislative Court Judicial Power: The Need for Balancing Competing Interests - Northern Pipeline Construction Company v. Marathon
More informationGUAM CODE ANNOTATED TITLE 7 CIVIL PROCEDURE JUDICIARY AND UPDATED THROUGH P.L (JUNE 5, 2018)
GUAM CODE ANNOTATED TITLE 7 CIVIL PROCEDURE AND JUDICIARY UPDATED THROUGH P.L. 34-107 (JUNE 5, 2018) TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE 7 CIVIL PROCEDURE & JUDICIARY DIVISION 1 COURTS AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS Chapter
More informationPatents in the Political Branches
Patents in the Political Branches JUSTIN BURNAM* ABSTRACT The Supreme Court granted certiorari in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene s Energy Group, LLC to decide if administrative proceedings called
More information2012 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.
Only the Westlaw citation is currently available. California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115, restricts citation of unpublished opinions in California courts. Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 3,
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 14-114 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States DAVID KING, ET AL., v. Petitioners, SYLVIA MATHEWS BURWELL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL., Respondents. On Writ of Certiorari to the
More informationJUDICIAL SELECTION IN SOUTH CAROLINA THE PROCESS
JUDICIAL SELECTION IN SOUTH CAROLINA THE PROCESS Judicial selection in South Carolina is a complicated multi-step process. Most members of the judiciary are elected by the General Assembly. However, some
More informationIn re Grabill Corporation: Another No for Jury Trials in the Bankruptcy Courts
Volume 38 Issue 1 Article 5 1993 In re Grabill Corporation: Another No for Jury Trials in the Bankruptcy Courts William J. Delany Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr
More informationAmerican Government Chapter 18 Notes The Federal Court System
American Government Chapter 18 Notes The Federal Court System Section 1 a. The National Judiciary B. Creation of a National Judiciary a. Framers of Constitution created a national judiciary b. A Dual Court
More informationU.S. Constitution and Impeachment
U.S. Constitution and Impeachment The Constitution makes the following provisions for the impeachment of officials: Article I, Section 2 Clause 5: The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker
More informationHyungjoo Han INTRODUCTION
REDEFINING NON-ARTICLE III ADJUDICATORY AUTHORITY POST-STERN V. MARSHALL Hyungjoo Han INTRODUCTION In 2011, the Supreme Court in Stern v. Marshall ruled that bankruptcy courts, as adjuncts of Article III
More informationConstitutionality of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
Constitutionality of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board U.S. Supreme Court Concludes That Only the Tenure Provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act Governing the Removal of PCAOB Members Are Unconstitutional
More informationSalary Linkage: Members of Congress and Certain Federal Executive and Judicial Officials
Order Code RS20388 Updated October 21, 2008 Salary Linkage: Members of Congress and Certain Federal Executive and Judicial Officials Summary Barbara L. Schwemle Analyst in American National Government
More informationLucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission 138 S. Ct (2018)
Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission 138 S. Ct. 2044 (2018) Justice KAGAN, delivered the opinion of the Court. The Appointments Clause of the Constitution lays out the permissible methods of appointing
More information