A Bunny’s Tale: Hopping Toward the End of Bankruptcy Jurisdiction?

By Intro by Prof. Ralph U. Whitten

On June 23, 2011, the United States Supreme Court decided Stern v. Marshall, previously discussed at ConsiderChapter13.org in A Bunny’s Tale:  The Impact of a Playboy Playmate on Federal Jurisdiction on February 11, 2011.   Readers will recall that the general question in the case concerned the power of a non-Article III bankruptcy judge to enter judgment on a state counterclaim, although there were many other interesting peripheral questions, such as the preclusive effect of a Texas state probate court judgment on the issues being determined in the bankruptcy court.  In a nutshell, the Supreme Court held that the bankruptcy judge had statutory power to decide the counterclaim, but lacked power under Article III of the Constitution to do so.  On the statutory point, the Court held that the counterclaim was a “core proceeding” under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b) (2006) that the bankruptcy judge was authorized to enter final judgment on.  On the constitutional issue, the Court held that the bankruptcy court was exercising the judicial power of the United States when it purported to resolve and enter final judgment on the state-law counterclaim.  The Court further rejected the arguments (1) that the counterclaim could be considered a matter of “public right” that could be decided outside the judicial branch and (2) that the bankruptcy court was not authorized by the Court’s precedents to hear the counterclaim because it was in response to a proof of claim filed by the creditor (the party defending against the counterclaim), (3) that the bankruptcy court could not be considered as acting as an “adjunct” to the district court, as opposed to itself exercising the essential attributes of judicial power, when it entered judgment on the counterclaim and (4) that any practical difficulties that would be caused by forbidding the bankruptcy courts from entering judgment on counterclaims like the one involved in the case did not justify departing from the important separation of powers policies embodied in Article III of the Constitution.  Thus, the Court affirmed the judgment of the court of appeals, with the ultimate result that the Texas probate court’s decision on the issues governing the counterclaim is preclusive and the counterclaim fails as a consequence.

Ralph U. Whitten Ralph U. Whitten is the Senator Allen A. Sekt Professor of Law at Creighton
University Law School. Professor Whitten has taught Civil Procedure, Conflict of
Laws, and Federal Courts for over thirty years. He is the author of numerous
articles in those subjects and has co-authored multiple editions of casebooks
and treatises in Civil Procedure and Conflict of Laws. He knows little or
nothing about bankruptcy and is, after a long career, pretty much uninterested
in learning more about the subject.
No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

April 5, 2020
By Robert (Bob) Schuman, Owner/Managing Broker, Network Financial Group Is it 2008 again? For us in the mortgage industry, we woke up this week feeling as if during the night, we were transported back to 2008 when the mortgage industry basically collapsed. Then, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the FHA were the exceptions. As of March 25, 2020, like everything...
May 28, 2023
Memorial Day 2023 Honoring the Sacrifices of All Who Served
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
December 18, 2022
Where a debtor fails to disclose to the Court or the trustee a forbearance on his mortgage that he was to pay directly, the Court would grant the trustee’s motion to modify to recapture as much as possible of the surplus funds the forbearance generated. (Kenney) In re Ilyev, 2022 WL 2965029 (Bankr. E.D. Va. July 26, 2022) Case Summary...
April 18, 2021
Bankruptcy Courts Grapple with the “COVID-19 Discharge” APPENDIX B Side-by-Side Comparison of 11 U.S.C. § 1328(b)-(i) and 11 U.S.C. § 1141(d)(5)(B)-(C) 11 U.S.C. § 1328(b)-(i) Discharge 11 U.S.C. § 1141(d)(5)(B)-(C) Effect of Confirmation (b) Subject to subsection (d), at any time after the confirmation of the plan and after notice and a hearing, the court may grant a discharge ....
October 2, 2022
Introduction In In re Village Apothecary, Inc.,1 the Sixth Circuit recently cut an attorney's fee by half, where the services were not successful. The panel held that the results obtained (or, actually, the lack of results) justified the dramatic reduction of the fees of attorneys for a Chapter 7 trustee. In Part 1, we looked at . . . It...
July 7, 2019
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Nashville, TN) The Commission heard from several individuals and attorneys that related tales of Chapter 7 trustees negotiating a “carve out” with a lienholder on the debtor’s real property when there was no equity available in the property. The way this works is that when property came into a Chapter 7...
April 7, 2019
Prior to his appointment as a bankruptcy judge for the District of Utah in September of 2015, Judge Anderson served for seventeen years as the Standing Chapter 13 Trustee for the District of Utah. During this time, he administered over 70,000 Chapter 13 cases. Judge Anderson was elected president of the National Association of Chapter 13 Trustees (NACTT), and he...
February 12, 2023
Previously the Emeritus Trustees (“ETC”) were asked to comment on “How to Manage Unprofessional and Discourteous Attorneys”. We now turn to ETC to share their collective wisdom when addressing the issues raised by incompetent, unprepared, and negligent bankruptcy counsel. Chapter 13 Trustees are required to administer cases in accordance with the duties set forth in 11 U.S.C. Sec. 1302 and...
November 15, 2020
By James J. Robinson, Chief United States Bankruptcy Judge, Northern District of Alabama Is the trustee’s service worth her commission? The Eleventh Circuit recently issued its opinion in In re Dukes, 909 F.3d 1306 (11th Cir. 2018), which spoke primarily to the issue of what it means for a mortgage to be “provided for” in the plan. The court found...
October 11, 2020
By James J. Robinson, Chief United States Bankruptcy Judge, Northern District of Alabama What are the statutory duties of the standing chapter 13 trustee? Bankruptcy Code §§ 1302 and 704 provide the statutory framework for the trustee’s duties, and provide as follows: 11 U.S.C. § 1302. Trustee (a) If the United States trustee appoints an individual under section 586(b) of...