Siegel v. Fitzgerald

Last updated

Siegel v. Fitzgerald
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued April 18, 2022
Decided June 6, 2022
Full case nameAlfred H. Siegel, Trustee of the Circuit City Stores, Inc. Liquidating Trust v. John P. Fitzgerald, III, Acting United States Trustee for Region 4
Docket no. 21-441
Citations596 U.S. ___ ( more )
Argument Oral argument
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Clarence Thomas  · Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito  · Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan  · Neil Gorsuch
Brett Kavanaugh  · Amy Coney Barrett
Case opinion
MajoritySotomayor, joined by unanimous
Laws applied
Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 2017

Siegel v. Fitzgerald, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the United States bankruptcy courts.

Contents

Background

Congress created the United States Trustee Program in the 1980s to transfer administrative functions of the bankruptcy courts to the executive branch. When it did so, Alabama and North Carolina were provided exemptions, remaining under the bankruptcy administrator program instead. Chapter 11 debtors in Trustee Program courts pay quarterly fees throughout the duration of their case, while debtors in administrator states were exempt until 2001, when the Judicial Conference of the United States issued a standing order making the fees the same rates in both systems. In 2017, the Trustee Fund faced a shortfall in funds, so Congress passed the Bankruptcy Judgeship Act of 2017, increasing fees dramatically in Trustee Program districts. The Judicial Conference extended the hike to administrator program districts, but only for new cases. Circuit City filed for bankruptcy in 2008, in a Trustee Program district, and saw its fees dramatically increase due to the hike. It challenged the increase as violating the uniformity requirement of the United States Constitution's Bankruptcy Clause. The bankruptcy court agreed, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed, over the dissent of Judge A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr. [1]

Supreme Court

Certiorari was granted in the case on January 10, 2022. Oral arguments were held on April 18, 2022. On June 6, 2022, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion reversing the Fourth Circuit as to the constitutionality of the fee increase, while remanding for consideration of what the remedy should be.

Related Research Articles

United States courts of appeals Post-1891 U.S. appellate circuit courts

The United States courts of appeals are the intermediate appellate courts of the United States federal judiciary. The courts of appeals are divided into thirteen circuits: eleven circuits, numbered First through Eleventh, that cover geographic areas of the United States and hear appeals from the U.S. district courts within their borders; the District of Columbia Circuit, which covers only Washington, D.C.; and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which hears appeals from federal courts across the United States in cases involving certain specialized areas of law. The courts of appeals also hear appeals from some administrative agency decisions and rulemaking, with by far the largest share of these cases heard by the D.C. Circuit. Appeals from decisions of the courts of appeals can be taken to the U.S. Supreme Court.

United States bankruptcy courts are courts created under Article I of the United States Constitution. The current system of bankruptcy courts was created by the United States Congress in 1978, effective April 1, 1984. United States bankruptcy courts function as units of the district courts and have subject-matter jurisdiction over bankruptcy cases. The federal district courts have original and exclusive jurisdiction over all cases arising under the bankruptcy code,, and bankruptcy cases cannot be filed in state court. Each of the 94 federal judicial districts handles bankruptcy matters.

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Federal appellate court for the western U.S.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is a federal court of appeals that has appellate jurisdiction over the U.S. district courts in the following federal judicial districts:

The United States Trustee Program is a component of the United States Department of Justice that is responsible for overseeing the administration of bankruptcy cases and private trustees. The applicable federal law is found at 28 U.S.C. § 586 and 11 U.S.C. § 101, et seq.

In the United States, bankruptcy is largely governed by federal law, commonly referred to as the "Bankruptcy Code" ("Code"). The United States Constitution authorizes Congress to enact "uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States". Congress has exercised this authority several times since 1801, including through adoption of the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, as amended, codified in Title 11 of the United States Code and the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA).

Central Virginia Community College v. Katz, 546 U.S. 356 (2006), is a United States Supreme Court case holding that the Bankruptcy Clause of the Constitution abrogates state sovereign immunity. It is significant as one of only three cases allowing Congress to use an Article I power to authorize individuals to sue states, the others being PennEast Pipeline Co. v. New Jersey and Torres v. Texas Department of Public Safety.

Travelers Casualty & Surety Co. of America v. Pacific Gas & Elec. Co., 549 U.S. 443 (2007), was a United States Supreme Court case about attorney's fees in bankruptcy cases. Justice Samuel Alito wrote the opinion for a unanimous court.

Toibb v. Radloff, 501 U.S. 157 (1991), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that individuals are eligible to file for relief under the reorganization provisions of chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, even if they are not engaged in a business. The case overturned the lower courts ruling which restricted individuals to chapter 7.

A Referee in Bankruptcy or Bankruptcy Referee was a federal official with quasi-judicial powers, appointed by a United States district court to administer bankruptcy proceedings, prior to 1979. The office was first created by the Bankruptcy Act of 1898, and was abolished by the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, which created separate United States bankruptcy courts with permanently assigned judges.

Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462 (2011), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a bankruptcy court, as a non-Article III court lacked constitutional authority under Article III of the United States Constitution to enter a final judgment on a state law counterclaim that is not resolved in the process of ruling on a creditor's proof of claim, even though Congress purported to grant such statutory authority under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)2(C). The case drew an unusual amount of interest because the petitioner was the estate of former Playboy Playmate and celebrity Anna Nicole Smith. Smith died in 2007, long before the Court ultimately decided the case, which her estate lost.

United States v. More, 7 U.S. 159 (1805), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that it had no jurisdiction to hear appeals from criminal cases in the circuit courts by writs of error. Relying on the Exceptions Clause, More held that Congress's enumerated grants of appellate jurisdiction to the Court operated as an exercise of Congress's power to eliminate all other forms of appellate jurisdiction.

Connecticut National Bank v. Germain, 503 U.S. 249 (1992), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that an interlocutory order of a district court, sitting as an appellate court in a bankruptcy case, is in turn reviewable by the court of appeals when authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 1292. Although the Justices were unanimous in deciding the specific statutory interpretation issue concerning bankruptcy appeals that the case presented, they disagreed on the extent to which it was appropriate to refer to the legislative history of the statute in resolving the case.

Things Remembered, Inc. v. Petrarca, 516 U.S. 124 (1995), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that when an action has been removed from state court to a United States Bankruptcy Court, and the bankruptcy court remands to state court because of a timely-raised defect in removal procedure or lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, the removal statute precludes a United States Court of Appeals from reviewing the order.

Law v. Siegel, 571 U.S. 415 (2014), is a ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States that describes the extent of the powers of bankruptcy courts in dealing with the bad faith of debtors.

Harris v. Viegelahn, 575 U.S. 498 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court clarified procedures for disposing wages after a debtor files for bankruptcy. In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Court held that if a debtor earns money after filing Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceedings, and converts to Chapter 7 bankruptcy before the money is sent to creditors, the debtor is permitted to keep those funds.

American Hospital Association v. Becerra, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case relating to administrative law. The case centered on a rule from the Department of Health and Human Services which reduced reimbursement rates for certain hospitals. Several hospital associations and hospitals affected by the rule sued HHS, alleging that it exceeded its statutory authority. The court was tasked with deciding if the rule was a reasonable interpretation of the law, and if the statute blocked judicial review of the rule in the first place.

Egbert v. Boule, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), is a United States Supreme Court case related to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents.

Southwest Airlines Co. v. Saxon, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the scope of the Federal Arbitration Act, in which the Court unanimously held that cargo loaders and ramp supervisors employed at airports are exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act.

Garland v. Gonzalez, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to immigration detention.

Johnson v. Arteaga-Martinez, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to immigration detention.

References

  1. Howe, Amy (January 10, 2022). "Justices add new cases on bankruptcy, workers' comp, and relief from final judgments". SCOTUSblog . Retrieved June 5, 2022.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)