The Burger Court pinion Writing Database Navarro Savings Association v. Lee 446 U.S. 458 (198) Paul J. Wahlbeck, George Washington University James F. Spriggs, II, Washington University in St. Louis Forrest Maltzman, George Washington University
$511.prriur Q.:Entrt of tilt Itnitrir tate!? Pazilingtott. (E. 2,543 CHAMBERS F THE CHIEF JUSTICE May 7, 198 Dear Lewis: I join. RE: 79-465 - Navarro Savings Assn. v. Lee Regards, Mr. Justice Powell Copies to the Conference
Altimente Puri of tilt 21Initet Atatto Naoilittgton. Q. mapig CHAMBERS F JUSTICE WN. J. BRENNAN, JR. April 25, 198 RE: No. 79-465 Navarro Savings Association v. Lee Dear Lewis: I agree. Sincerely, Mr. Justice Powell cc: The Conference
Atirrentt (court of tilt Atitttr ;Slates agfringion. P 211Pig CHAMBERS r JUSTICE PTTER STEWART April 3, 198 ro t Re: No. 79-465, Navarro Savings Assn. v. Lee 21 1-1 Dear Lewis, I am glad to join your opinion for the Court. Sincerely yours, ft.1 Mr. Justice Powell Copies to the Conference ro.3 1-1 r,,x1 cn. cn
:$ulartutt (Court a tilt tzttro Paokington,. Q. 2Japg CHAMBERS F JUSTICE BYRN R. WHITE April 26, 198 Re: No. 79-465 - Navarro Savings Assn. v. Lawrence F. Lee, Jr., et al Dear Lewis, /-1 z Please join me. Sincerely yours, c-) 1-+ C C15 1 21 Mr. Justice Powell C") Copies to the Conference
Rittprrinr (Court of tite,.%tatts lao4ington, D. (c. CHAMBERS F JUSTICE THURGD MARSHALL May 14, 198 Re; No. 79-465 - Navarro Savings Association v, Lee Dear Lewis; Please join me. Sincerely, T.M. Mr, Justice Powell cc; The Conference
$ttprtutt (Court of titt 'Anita Abate asitiltont,. al. zripig CHAMBERS F JUSTICE HARRY A. BLACKMUN April 25, 198 Re: No. 79-465 - Navarro Savings Association v. Lee Dear Lewis: I find this case much more difficult than your opinion - indicates. While I shall probably end up where you do, I am contemplating, for now, writing separately. I shall appreciate it if you will give me a few days to make up my mind whether to do this. Sincerely, Mr. Justice Powell cc: The Conference
To: The Chief Justice Mr. J1,12tic,.? Erennan Mr. J;.s-',:ice. 3to'.;art Mr. Mr. Just-;.c., Mr. Justic2 -;t1c-:':. JU.7/ 22 Fr= Li. Justice.7.17acmua cis c d: MAY 5 198 1st DRAFT SUPREME CURT F THE UNITED STATES No. 79-465 Navarro Savings Association, Petitioner, n Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Ap- u' peals for the Fifth Circuit. Lawrence F, Lee, Jr. et al. [May, 198] CT/ z 1-3 1-4 cr, =1 MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, dissenting. A reader of the Court's conclusionary opinion might wonder why this heavily burdened tribunal chose to review this case. Most assuredly, we did not do so merely to reaffirm, ante, at 1-1 4, Mr. Chief Justice Marshall's ruling from the bench in 1-3 Chappedelaine v. Dechenaux, 4 Cranch 36. 38 (188), to the effect that aliens serving respectively as residuary legatee and )-4 representative of an estate, "although they sue as trustees;" cn were entitled to bring a federal diversity action against a Georgia citizen. Rather. I had thought that we granted certiorari to resolve a significant conflict among the courts of appeals concerning the question whether the citizenship of a business trust, for purposes of establishing diversity jurisdiction, is determined by looking to the citizenship of its trustees or that of its beneficial shareholders.' I believe that the I Compare the decision below, 597 F. 2d 421 (CA5 1979), rev'g 416 F. Stipp. 1186 (ND Tex. 1976), with Belle View Apartments v. Realty ReFund Trust, 62 F. 2d 668 (CA4 1979), and Riverside Memorial Mausoleum, Inc. v. UMET Trust, 581 F. 2d 62 (CA3 1978), aff'g 434 F. Supp. 58 (ED Pa 1977). See also cases cited in n. 6. infra, dealing with an analogous question presented in the context of limited partnerships. The Court of Appeals' decisicn in this case also conflicts with a substantial body of recent holdings of federal district courts, that uniformly. have looked to the citizenship of the beneficial shareholders, and not the trustees, in determining the existence of diversity in suits brought by or against common-law business trusts. See National City Bank v. Fidelco-
To :The Chi ef JUStiCe Mr. Just ic3 3renna2L Mr. just, cc; Stewart Yr. Just:Lc Mr. Ju:t imafshall j. Ju3t i 7,: e 7371311 Jurtio Yr JU3tlee F7'om: lir. Justice B-Hc1::::.un C-1 r,-.31.1.1at Y.:I : 2nd DRAFT SUPREME CURT F THE UNITED STATES No. 79-465 a 7z ro tv n tt w ro m Z P-i M na Navarro Savings Association, r. Petitioner, n Writ of Certiorari to the r-. tti United States Court of Ap- Hi V. Hi peals for the Fifth Circuit. cm Lawrence F. Lee, Jr. et al. [May, 198] z cn P=1 MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, dissenting. A reader of the Court's conclusionary opinion might wonder why this heavily burdened tribunal chose to review this case. Most assuredly, we did not do so merely to reaffirm, ante, at 4, Mr. Chief Justice Marshall's ruling from the bench in Chappedelaine v. Dechenaux, 4 Cranch 36, 38 (188), to the effect that aliens serving respectively as residuary legatee and representative of an estate, "although they sue as trustees," were entitled to bring a federal diversity action against a Georgia citizen. Rather, I had thought that we granted_certiorari to resolve a significant conflict among the Courts of Appeals concerning the question whether the citizenship of a business trust, for purposes of establishing diversity jurisdiction, is determined by looking to the citizenship of its trustees or that of its beneficial shareholders.' I believe that the CC t- to ro I Compare the decision below, 597 F. 2d 421 (CA5 1979), rev'g 416 F. Supp. 1186 (ND Tex. 1976), with Belle View Apartments v. Realty ReFund Trust, 62 F. 2d 668 (CA4 1979), and Riverside Memorial Mausoleum, Inc. v. UMET Trust, 581 F. 2d 62 (CA3 1978), aff'g 434 F. cn Supp. 58 (ED Pa. 1977). See also cases cited in n. 6, infra, dealing with an analogous question presented in the context of limited partnerships. The Court of Appeals' decision in this case also conflicts with a substantial body of recent holdings of federal district courts, that uniformly have looked to the citizenship of the beneficial shareholders, and not the trustees, in determining the existence of diversity in suits brought by or against common-law business trusts. See National City Bank v. Fidelco
(hi e-f 1 ' ' Stewart its -3112.11 4-24-8 : --4 '71un i. et )1.18?owall 7c) 1st DRAFT Circulat ed: d: SUPREME CURT F THE UNITEDR TIVEge APR 2 4 198 P=1 No. 79-465 Navarro Savings Association,?3 n Writ of Certiorari to the Petitioner, o v. United States Court of Ap- peals for the Fifth Circuit. o Lawrence F. Lee, Jr. et al. oti [May, 198] MR. JUSTICE PWELL delivered the opinion of the Court. The question is whether the trustees of a business trust may invoke the diversity jurisdiction of the federal courts on the basis of their own citizenship, rather than that of the /-3 trust's beneficial shareholders. 1-4 The respondents are eight individual trustees of Fidelity Mortgage Investors, a business trust organized under Massachusetts law.' They hold titre to real estate investments in trust for the benefit of Fidelity's shareholders.- The declaration of trust gives the respondents exclusive authority over this property "free from any power and control of the C Shareholders. to the same extent as if the Trustees were the sole owners of the Trust Estate in their own right...." ' z The respondents have power to transact Fidelity's business, 1 Fidelity merged. into a Delaware corporation in 1978, but Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 25 (c) permits the original parties to continue the litigation. Jurisdiction turns cn the facts existing at the time the suit commenced: Louisville, V. A. tt: C. R. Co. v. Louisville Trust Co., 174 U. S. 552, 556 (1599). 2 Fidelity Mortgage Investors Fifth Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust (hereinafter Fidelity Declaration of Trust), App. A44 A45. 3 Id, Art. 3.1, App, A49 A5. cn
;$uvrentt (Core o f tbegititer itattif P asilitt4trat. P. (4. 2-crPtg C HAM BEMS F JUSTICE LEWIS F PWELL,JR. April 28, 198 79-465-Navarro-Savings-Association-v:- ee Dear Harry: Thank you for your note. By all means, take all the time you need. Sincerely, Mr. Justice Blackmun lfp/ss cc: The Conference
L-1-7 J ust 3r winan Stewart 7:1 ite..77.111all,,-;-'-tmun II7.xquist. 1-,vens From: Mr. -, Powell P:1 5-8-8 cs n = Circulated. rli Ili,,1'. ;a13.113 L:, Recirculated: 2nd DRAFT z 1-3 SUPREME CURT F THE UNITED STATES g c-) No. 79-465 r-, n 1-3 1--4 Navarro Savings Association, o Petitioner, n Writ of Certiorari to the m v. United States Court of Ap- o peals for the Fifth Circuit. Lawrence F. Lee, Jr. et al. [May, 198] or, o MR. JUSTICE PWELL delivered the opinion of the Court. The question is whether the trustees of a business trust may invoke the diversity jurisdiction of the federal courts on the basis of their own citizenship, rather than that of the trust's beneficial shareholders. 1-4 The respondents are eight individual trustees of Fidelity Mortgage Investors, a business trust organized under Massa- 1-1 chusetts law.' They hold title to real estate investments in trust for the benefit of Fidelity's shareholders. 2 The declaration of trust gives the respondents exclusive authority over this property "free from any power and control of the Shareholders, to the same extent as if the Trustees were the sole owners of the Trust Estate in their own right...." 3 The respondents have power to transact Fidelity's business, Fidelity merged into a Delaware corporation in 1978, but Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 25 (c) permits the original parties to continue the litigation, Jurisdiction turns en the facts existing at the time the suit commenced. Louisville, N. A. ct C. R. Co. v. Louisville Trust Co., 174 U. S. 552, 556 (1899). 2 Fidelity Mortgage Investors Fifth Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust (hereinafter Fidelity Declaration of Trust), App. A44 A45. 3 Id., Art. 3.1, App. A49 A5.
May 15, 198 No. 79-465 Navarro Savings Assoc. v. Lee Dear Chief: As I will be at the Fifth Circuit Judicial Conference on Monday, I would appreciate your announcing my decision in the above case. We affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Mr. Justice Blackmun filed a dissenting opinion. Sincerely, The Chief Justice LFP/lab
ttprrou' 1:r-ort sf tirr se: %fairo Pa5iringtui4 P 211Pt3 CHAMBERS JUSTICE WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST April 28, 198 ro = = Re: No. 79-465 - Navarro Savings Assoc. v. Lee ro Dear Lewis: Please join me. Sincerely,,!A 1-+ cn ro Mr. Justice Powell Copies to the Conference cn = Cn 1-1 ryy rj cn
,1143trutt irtz-f offf gititztr -, $tairo oofrington, p. cc. 2.apkg CHAMBERS F JUSTICE JHN PAUL STEVENS April 24, 198 Re: 79-465 - Navarro Savings v. Lee Dear Lewis: Please join me. Respectfully, Mr. Justice Powell Copies to the Conference