"Providing Denver Businesses with the highest quality Printing and Branding Solutions"
For all your print needs
MetroGraphics
MetroGraphics
476, 536, 537. Information Regarding the Activities of the Assn. See Leonard J. Emmerglick, A Century of the New Equity, 23 Tex. The two then took to the courts to try to undo the foreclosure and sale. In 1954, as one of many changes to Fannie Mae's charter, Congress amended Fannie Mae's sue-and-be-sued clause to authorize it to sue and to be sued, and to complain and to defend, in any court of competent jurisdiction, State or Federal. Housing Act of 1954, Pub.L. 613. Its alternative readings of court of competent jurisdiction are premised on the already rejected reading of Red Cross. . 14CV0784, 2014 WL 4548638 (N.D.Tex. Unlike the corporate charter at issue in American National Red Cross v. S .G., 505 U.S. 247 (1992), Fannie Mae's sue-and-be-sued clause contains a provisothe phrase of competent jurisdiction. The majority offers a few potential readings of this phrase, but each of these constructions effectively renders the proviso superfluous. The amendment to Fannie Mae's sue-and-be-sued clause was part and parcel of this overarching intendment. It never once mentioned the change to Fannie Mae's sue-and-be-sued clause. The corporate charter of the Federal National Mortgage Association, known as Fannie Mae, authorizes Fannie Mae to sue and to be sued, and to complain and to defend, in any court of competent jurisdiction, State or Federal. 12 U.S.C. 1723a(a). "[5][6] District Judge Sidney H. Stein, sitting by designation, dissented, concluding that the sue-and-be-sued clause required an independent source for jurisdiction in cases involving Fannie Mae. Corp., 2017 U.S. Dist. Dissent at 23. LIGHTFOOT v. CENDANT MORTGAGE CORPORATION PHH. Waiver of right of respondents Fannie Mae to respond filed. See id. The certainty of the dissent may explain the lower court decisions adopting a broader reading of Red Cross. In specifically mentioning the federal courts, Fannie Maes sue-and-be-sued clause resembles the three clauses this Court has held confer jurisdiction. The dissent relies on the phrase court of competent jurisdiction in the clause. Some courts read 206 not to confer jurisdiction and instead assessed their jurisdiction under the federal-question jurisdiction statute. Mar. See id. 1332 over suits in which Fannie Mae was a party. And a courts subject-matter jurisdiction defines its power to hear cases. See Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 (1968 Act), 82 Stat. Decided January 18, 2017. Dev. The Senate report specifically stated that HLBB proceedings could be in the Federal judicial district in which the association is located. S.Rep. @AHoweBlogger was there and has the story: Protesters supporting abortion rights briefly interrupt oral argument - SCOTUSblog. The following state regulations pages link to this page. At most then, this point might support reading the phrase to refer to both subject-matter and personal jurisdiction. Ginnie Mae had no use for diversity jurisdiction whatsoeverit had plenary access to the federal courts as an agency of the federal government. Compare 28 U.S.C. See, e.g., Welch v. Burton, 252 S.W.2d 411, 413 (Ark.1952) (Fannie Mae joined as defendant in quiet title action); Malcolm MacDowell & Assocs. The mortgage was sold to the private mortgage company and, after efforts to prevent the foreclosure failed, the home was sold at a trustee's sale. . at 257. . Mortg. 141055. In 1970, when Freddie Macs sue-and-be-sued clause and related jurisdictional provisions were enacted, Freddie Mac was a Government-owned corporation. See Am. Unable to make her payments, Hollis-Arrington pursued a forbearance arrangement with Cendant. Along with these structural changes, the 1954 Act replaced Fannie Maes initial set of powers with a more detailed list. No. Oklahoma, 11-19-2018. At that point, the government would no longer own more than half of the corporation's capital stock, Fannie Mae's administrator would request that the company be completely turned over to its private owners, and Fannie Mae would be in the position of every other federally chartered corporation that does not receive the special treatment of a jurisdiction-conferring sueand-be-sued clause. Supreme Court cases from Deveaux to D'Oench had put Congress on notice that a specific reference to the federal courts was necessary and sufficient to confer jurisdiction. Red Cross, 505 U.S. at 252 (emphasis added). At, Supreme Court of United States By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR For the Appearing Parties: -----Judgment Text. See Housing Act of 1954, Pub.L. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22A373/244538/20221101152621020_SCOTUS%20--%20Motion%20for%20Injunction%20Pending%20Appeal%20Garrison%20v.%20ED%20pdfa.pdf 12,076 No. Once the capital stock owned by the Secretary was retired, the convertible bonds could be exchanged for common stock and Fannie Mae could issue more common stock directly to the public. Instead, there was silence. At the time of the 1954 amendment, Fannie Mae's charter's reference to court[s] of law or equity had become an antiquarian relic with little relevance to the American legal system. Diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. at 2851; see Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S.Ct. See Western Securities Co. v. Derwinski, 937 F.2d 1276 (CA7 1991) (Under 38 U.S.C. 1820(a)(1) (1988 ed. 41(20) (1946), with ch. Rather, the legislative history strongly suggests that the amendment was intended to allow Fannie Mae to move its principal place of business to the suburbs without effecting any change to the place where it would be subject to general jurisdiction. See Act of Feb. 13, 1925, ch. The Court held that the clause conferred federal question jurisdiction. 668 (2012). The absence of any change to Ginnie Mae's charter confirms this interpretation of the Fannie Mae amendment. filed. Unable to make her payments, Hollis-Arrington pursued a forbearance arrangement with Cendant PETITIONER:Crystal Monique Lightfoot, et al. . Nat'l Mortgage Ass'n v. Moreno, No. Corp., No. The 1954 amendments, while using the new phrase court of competent jurisdiction in Fannie Mae's sue-and-be-sued clause, retained the specific reference to the federal courts. filed. We cannot ignore the of competent jurisdiction proviso; we must determine what it means. But the 1954 amendments did not completely privatize Fannie Mae, which remained, even after 1954, a federally chartered corporation with specific statutory requirements for its corporate governance. See Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston v. Moodys Corp., 821 F.3d 102 (CA1 2016) (Federal Home Loan Bank of Bostons identical sue-and-be-sued clause); Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corp. Retiree Medical Benefits Trust ex rel. Id. The Court concluded that this section merely granted the Bank the capacity to sue. 803214, at A115, A121, A123 (1948). 9, 2012); In re Fannie Mae 2008 Sec. Nat. Alert me when this program is: Available online; Airing on the C-SPAN Networks. It argues that its original sue-and-be-sued clause, enacted in 1934, granted jurisdiction to federal courts and that there is no indication that Congress wanted to change the status quo in 1954. Tapauksen nimi Docket no. The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including September 19, 2016. They maintain that if Red Cross does stand for the rule that the word federal in a charter confers federal jurisdiction, the Court should overrule Red Cross. Fed. 831472, at 43. The district court dismissed the case for failure to state a claim, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed. With the proviso included, Fannie Mae's sue-and-be-sued clause does not confer automatic federal subject matter jurisdiction over any action to which Fannie Mae is a party; jurisdiction must arise from some other source. Further, Fannie Mae notes that the language for this amendment was identical to language in Title I of the charter, and two federal courts had already held that the language in Title I conferred federal jurisdiction. Neither of these sue-and-be-sued clauses confers automatic federal jurisdiction. In Lightfoot v. Cendant Mortgage Corp., No. At the time the second Bank was chartered, the circuit courts had both original and appellate jurisdiction over certain civil actions. Congress has utilized substantively identical language in other sue-and-be-sued clauses, and the courts of appeals have overwhelmingly agreed that an of competent jurisdiction proviso requires an alternative basis of jurisdiction. May 25, 2011) (construing the FHLB's substantively identical sue-and-be-sued clause); Fed. Home Loan Bank of Indianapolis v. Banc of Am. He and his fellow dissenters would have held that the clause conferred only corporate capacity to sue and be sued, and that subject matter jurisdiction had to be conferred by some other provision of federal law. The change in Fannie Mae's sue-and-be-sued clause is best explained as getting rid of this anachronism, as Congress had recently done in other statutes. on Banking and Currency, 93d Cong., Compilation of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, at 277 (Comm. See id. The legislative history of the 1974 amendment is consistent with this reading. digest from follow.it by In Osborn, the purpose of the phrase in all State Courts having competent jurisdiction was to emphasize that the clause did not authorize or require the exercise of subject matter jurisdiction by a state court with narrow, specialized jurisdiction. Fannie Mae would have no use for diversity jurisdiction if it could enter the federal courts pursuant to its sue-and-be-sued clause. We affirm the district court. 505 U.S., at 253. 1723a(a). Indeed, with respect to jurisdiction, Congress made clear that it wanted to increase the HLBB's access to federal courts. The House Report went into great detail explaining the provisions of the 1954 amendments designed to privatize Fannie Mae. R.R. When petitioners Beverly Ann Hollis-Arrington and her daughter Crystal Lightfoot filed suit in state court alleging deficiencies in the refinancing, foreclosure, and sale of their home, Fannie Mae removed the case to federal court, relying on its sue-and-be-sued clause as the basis for jurisdiction. The Red Cross's charter gave that organization the power to sue and be sued in courts of law and equity, State or Federal, within the jurisdiction of the United States. Red Cross, 505 U.S. at 248. v. EcorseLincoln Park Bank, 38 N.W.2d 921, 92122 (Mich.1949) (Fannie Mae sued for breach of a mortgage-related contract). No. Last month, Amy Coney Barrett single-handedly denied a separate but similar request. Per SCOTUSBlog, the holding in Lightfoot v.Cendant Mortgage Corp is: "Fannie Mae's sue-and-be-sued clause does not grant federal courts jurisdiction over all cases involving Fannie Mae." Judgment: Reversed, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Sotomayor on January 18, 2017. Cf. Lightfoot and Hollis-Arrington then contend that the rule that they find in Red Cross does not resolve this case. We disagree. Given the important practical effect of eliminating federal question jurisdiction under Fannie Mae's sue-and-be-sued clause, we should expect the House or the Senate to have said something if they intended a change of that sort. at 817. Sanders Co. v. BHAP Hous. The Supreme Court granted certiorari on June 28, 2016. [1] entering your email. The latter basis of jurisdiction does not contain an amount-in-controversy requirement, a complete-diversity requirement, or a forum-defendant rule. 831472, at 43; see also H.R.Rep. It read that decision to have established a rule [that] resolves this case: When a sue-and-be-sued clause in a federal charter expressly authorizes suit in federal courts, it confers jurisdiction on the federal courts. Dissent at 3435. Facsimile886-2-6612-5188 ), Secretary of Housing and Urban Developments authority in his official capacity, to sue and be sued in any court of competent jurisdiction, State or Federal); Industrial Indemnity, Inc. v. Landrieu, 615 F.2d 644 (CA5 1980) (per curiam) (similar); Lindy v. Lynn, 501 F.2d 1367 (CA3 1974) (similar). Second, a different section of the Bank's charter explicitly provided for federal jurisdiction in certain suits against the president and directors of the Bank. Lightfoot v. Cendant Mortg. 831429, at 2; see id. The dissent argues that if the 1954 sue-and-be-sued clause confers federal question jurisdiction, there would have been no need to confer District of Columbia corporate status on Fannie Mae in 1974, and thereby to confer diversity jurisdiction over suits to which Fannie Mae is a party. In 1954, the same year Congress amended Fannie Mae's charter, Congress eliminated federal question jurisdiction for the FSLIC by deleting language in its charter that had authorized suit in any court of law or equity, State or Federal. Congress replaced it with language authorizing suit in any court of competent jurisdiction in the United States. See H.R.Rep. Telephone886-2-6616-9999. [9] After reviewing other party-specific sue-and-be-sued clauses, Justice Sotomayor stated that the phrase "court of competent jurisdiction" allowed any court with "an existing source of subject-matter jurisdiction" to hear cases against Fannie Mae. Ann O'Connell for the United States as amicus curiae, by special leave of the Court, supporting the Petitioners. See Red Cross, 505 U.S. at 260. Rather, it restated the basic rule of Deveaux and Osborn that a sue-and-be-sued clause conferring only a general right to sue does not grant jurisdiction to the federal courts. No. Apr. The clause does not, according to Lightfoot and Hollis-Arrington, confer federal subject-matter jurisdiction over all claims by or against Fannie Mae. & P. Ry. Indeed, the Supreme Court in Red Cross reinforced the importance of this canon in the context of sue-and-be-sued clauses. But nothing in Fannie Maes sue-and-be-sued clause suggests that the reference to court of competent jurisdiction refers only to a court with personal jurisdiction over the parties before it. Congress went about its task expeditiouslyit simply deleted references to courts of law or equity.3 Congress did not replace these phrases with new references to courts of competent jurisdiction for a singularly valid reason. Section 1332 fills in the rest, making that District of Columbia corporation a District citizen, and therefore eligible for diversity jurisdiction. Corp., 61 F. App'x 463 (9th Cir.2003). This brief, ambiguous statement did not settle the meaning of 216(b), and thus did not settle the meaning of the phrase court of competent jurisdiction. The other cases in this set dealt with the Housing and Rent Act of 1947. Lightfoot and Hollis-Arrington argue that the sue-and-be-sued clause in Title III of Fannie Maes corporate charter allows Fannie Mae to bring suit on its behalf and allows others to bring suit against it. 769 F.3d 681, 682683 (2014). 7831, 2009 WL 4067266, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. [3] Relying upon a federal law that granted Fannie Mae the right "to sue and to be sued, and to complain and to defend, in any court of competent jurisdiction, State or Federal" (the "sue-and-be-sued clause"), Fannie Mae filed a motion to remove the case to federal court. After determining that the state district and superior courts were courts of competent jurisdiction with jurisdiction adequate and appropriate under established local law to grant treble damages, the Court held in Testa that such courts were required to hear suits under the Act. Lightfoot and Hollis-Arrington argue that the imperative to avoid constitutional difficulty under the constitutional avoidance doctrine would preclude Fannie Mae from having automatic federal question jurisdiction. 29 U.S.C. 216(b). Williams v. Jacksonville Terminal Co., 315 U.S. 386, 390 (1942). The Act specified that federal and state courts had concurrent jurisdiction. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. Housing prices amounted to 12.82 times household income in New Taipei City, with mortgage burdens taking up 52.41 percent, it said. Another provision allowed suits in federal court against certain bank officials, suggesting the right to sue does not imply a right to sue in the courts of the union, unless it be expressed. Id., at 86. The merger largely rendered references to courts of law and equity into historical curiosities. There, the Court explained that a statute providing for the transfer to a trustee of the interest of the owner in the vessel and freight, provides only that the trustee may be appointed by any court of competent jurisdiction, leaving the question of such competency to depend on other provisions of law. Id., at 617. See Pub.L. 646, 1338, 1343, 62 Stat. See 505 U.S., at 271272 (opinion of Scalia, J.) The Court rejected this approach and held that the Red Cross's charter confers automatic jurisdiction only in the district courtstoday, the sole federal courts of broad original jurisdiction. As explained above, the phrase of competent jurisdiction signals that the section containing that phrase will not also harbor a grant of jurisdiction. No. Contact us. Congress' pronouncement confirms that Fannie Mae's sue-and-be-sued clause does not confer federal jurisdiction. To stave off the foreclosure, Hollis-Arrington and her daughter, Crystal Lightfoot, pursued bankruptcy and transferred the property between themselves. 2014), where the court construed the "sue and be sued" clause in Fannie Mae's federal charter as a basis for conferring federal question jurisdiction. [10] Consequently, Justice Sotomayor held that federal law "permits suit in any state or federal court already endowed with subject-matter jurisdiction over the suit. (ECF No. We disagree. 11CV10952, 2012 WL 769731, at *13 (D.Mass. Armed with these earlier cases, as synthesized by Red Cross, we turn to the sue-and-be-sued clause at issue here. [8], In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the Court reversed the Ninth Circuit's ruling and rejected Fannie Mae's assertion that it could automatically remove any case to a federal court. . But all of these cases predate Red Cross. The Senate Bill, which retained the old phrase in any court of law or equity, would not have changed the ownership of Fannie Mae. Under the general federal question jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the case and the denial of the Rule 60(b) motion. See Dissent at 3334. 941(c) (The telephone bank shall, for the purposes of jurisdiction and venue, be deemed a citizen and resident of the District of Columbia. (emphasis added)); 28 U.S.C. Each mention of a rule refers back to this principle. In 1954, as we discuss in more detail below, Congress exchanged court of law or equity for court of competent jurisdiction not just in Fannie Mae's charter, but also in the charters of the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) and the Home Loan Bank Board. DOCKET NO. 1 at 2.) This website may use cookies to improve your experience. No. The Supreme Court's decision in the case of Lightfoot v. Cendant Mortgage Corp. ends a 15-year court battle between a mother-daughter duo and a mortgage lender, in which the plaintiffs claimed . They argue that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over their claims. During debate on this provision, Senator Logan asked Senator Bulkley, the chair of the subcommittee with authority over the bill, about the original sue-and-be-sued clause. at 760. Fannie Mae counters that Lightfoot and Hollis-Arringtons interpretation of the language in the sue-and-be-sued clause is incorrect because it renders the words State or Federal superfluous. v. CENDANT MORTGAGE CORP., DBA . & Loan Ins. In 2002, Lightfoot and Hollis-Arrington filed a joint action, again pro se, in California state court against the same parties from the 2001 federal action and alleging the same conspiracy. Housing Act of 1954 503(2). 831429, at 27. The unaffordability reading was much sharper in Taipei, with housing prices equivalent to 16.17 times average household income and 66.12 percent of the money going to mortgage payments, the ministry said. Those decisions support the rule that a congressional charters sue and be sued provision may be read to confer federal court jurisdiction if, but only if, it specifically mentions the federal courts. Id., at 255. filed. 01-18-2017. So long as the sue-and-be-sued clause refers to an outside source of subject-matter jurisdiction, it does not confer subject-matter jurisdiction. Ass'n v. Raines, 534 F.3d 779, 784 (D.C.Cir.2008) (holding, based on Fannie Mae's charter, that federal question jurisdiction exists over suits brought by or against Fannie Mae). I therefore respectfully dissent. The prior construction canon of statutory interpretation does not apply because none of the cases on which Fannie Mae relies suggest that Congress in 1954 would have surveyed the jurisprudential landscape and necessarily concluded that the courts had already settled the question whether a sue-and-be-sued clause containing the phrase court of competent jurisdiction confers jurisdiction on the federal courts. When Congress creates corporations, it has full authority to make such restrictions on the sue and be sued clause as seem to it appropriate or necessary. Fed. See 12 U.S.C. See Pirelli, 534 F.3d at 786 (If Congress in 1954 did not want to continue to confer federal jurisdiction in Fannie Mae cases, it logically would have omitted the word Federal from the statute, not attempted a bank shot by adding the words of competent jurisdiction. ). Fannie Mae claims that the Court would not overrule a rule that is so grounded and settled in its application. The Supreme Court's application of the default rule over the past two centuries defines the interpretive tools for our analysis. 476, 536 (1968) (codified as amended at 12 U.S.C. They contend that Congress bestows upon GSEs unique federal purposes, and thus GSEs should be distinguished from regular private corporations. Under the rule announced in American National Red Cross v. S.G., 505 U.S. 247 (1992), Fannie Mae's federal charter confers federal question jurisidiction over claims brought by or against Fannie Mae. Opinion. Like Justice Scalia and his fellow dissenters in Red Cross, the dissent argues that the clause confers only corporate capacity to sue and be sued, and that subject matter jurisdiction must come from some other provision of federal law. 1717(a)(2)(B). The of competent jurisdiction proviso serves precisely the same purpose in Fannie Mae's charterthe only difference is that the proviso applies to the courts of the states and the federal government. But if we need an additional purpose for the phrase, it is not hard to find one. Some, including the lower courts here, have understood it to set out a rule that an express reference to the federal courts suffices to make a sue-and-be-sued clause a grant of fed-eral jurisdiction. Making the Highest Court more accessible for a modern audience. 869, 93033; H.R.Rep. The 1954 Act required the Secretary of the Treasury to allow Fannie Mae to repurchase that stock. No courtstate or federalis competent to hear a suit involving Fannie Mae unless it has subject matter jurisdiction by some means other than Fannie Mae's sue-and-be-sued clause. 2846, 2853 (2011). Id. Hollis-Arrington alleged that Cendant and Fannie Mae had conspired to allow unqualified buyers access to mortgage loans knowing that Cendant could in turn acquire the properties once they went into foreclosure. It sees its only remaining task as explaining why that would not render court of competent jurisdiction superfluous. In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the Court held that plaintiffs may file lawsuits against Fannie Mae in any state or federal court that is "already endowed with subject-matter jurisdiction over the suit." Congress' intent for the Housing Act of 1954to place the government and Fannie Mae on paths that would ultimately divergewas clear. This is an interesting hypothetical, but one without relevance to the issue presented in this case. See id. Yet Fannie Mae and Ginnie Mae kept precisely the same sue-and-be-sued clause, authorizing them both to sue and be sued, and to complain and to defend, in any court of competent jurisdiction, State or Federal. 12 U.S.C. at 260. It follows that a court of competent jurisdiction is a court with a grant of subject-matter jurisdiction covering the case before it. The American Red Cross agrees, arguing that overruling Red Cross on the grounds of statutory interpretation would create separation of powers concerns between the Legislative Branch and Judicial Branch. Fannie Mae removed the case to federal court based on a sue-and-be-sued . Brief amicus curiae of The American Association for Justice filed. Because Fannie Maes charter does not contain this language, Lightfoot and Hollis-Arrington argue that it would be wrong to read it as though it did. 1723a(a)) (emphasis added). This clause inarguably gave Fannie Mae access to the federal courts. We affirm the district court's dismissal of plaintiffs' claims for the reasons stated in our previous unpublished disposition. Osborn, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) Benefits Trust ex rel. Argued November 8, 2016Decided January 18, 2017. Those cases confirm that the provisions require suit to be brought in federal courts but do not discuss the basis for federal jurisdiction. at 265 (Scalia, J., dissenting). Nat'l Mortg. . Mortgage Assn. Follow 738, 817 (1824). And Congress may also draft a sue-and-be-sued clause to confer federal jurisdiction upon any suit to which the federal corporation is a party.
Complex Ptsd Retraumatization, Disadvantages Of Conventional Landing Gear, What Did Samurai Use Before Katana, Hydraulic Bridge Explanation, Bandlab Drum Machine Patterns, Wheeler Ar Ultra Armorers Kit, Top Emergency Medicine Articles 2022, Bus From Istanbul Airport To Bursa, Trane Compressor Models,
This entry was posted in where can i buy father sam's pita bread. Bookmark the coimbatore to madurai government bus fare.
lightfoot v cendant mortgage corp