Document: 513 U.S. 18115 S.Ct. 386130 L.Ed.2d 233 BANCORP MORTGAGE COMPANY, Petitioner,v.BONNER MALL PARTNERSHIP. No. 93-714. Supreme Court of the United States Argued Oct. 4, 1994. Decided Nov. 8, Syllabus * After this granted petition for a writ certiorari and received briefing on merits, parties entered into settlement agreed that case was thereby mooted. Petitioner, however, also requested exercise its power under 28 U.S.C. § 2106 to vacate judgment Appeals. Respondent opposed motion. Held: 1. This does not lack entertain petitioner's motion vacate. Section supplies vacatur power, respondent's suggestion is rejected Article III's or controversy requirement prohibits when no live dispute exists due has mooted case. Although III prevents from considering merits become moot while awaiting review, may nevertheless make such disposition whole as justice require. Walling v. Reuter Co., 321 671, 677, 64 826, 829, 88 L.Ed. 1001. Pp. __. 2. Mootness by reason justify federal civil review. Munsingwear, 340 36, 39-40, 71 104, 106-107, 95 subsequent cases distinguished. Equitable principles have always been implicit in Court's principal equitable factor which looked whether party seeking caused mootness voluntary action. Where results settlement, losing voluntarily forfeited his legal remedy ordinary processes appeal certiorari, surrendering claim extraordinary vacatur. It irrelevant who won below since it burden demonstrating entitlement result supported public interest orderly operation judicial system; countervailing policy arguments are persuasive. exceptional circumstances conceivably do include mere fact agreement provides Motion denied dismissed moot. Reported below: 2 F.3d 899 (CA 9 1993). SCALIA, J., delivered opinion unanimous Court. Bradford Anderson, Seattle, WA, petitioner. Edwin S. Kneedler, Washington, DC, amicus curiae special leave John Ford Elsaesser, Jr., Sandpoint, ID, respondent. Justice SCALIA 1 The question appellate courts system should judgments subordinate settled after filed sought. In 1984 1985, Northtown Investments built Bonner Mall County, Idaho, with financing bank State. 1986, respondent Partnership (Bonner) acquired mall, petitioner Bancorp Mortgage Co. (Bancorp) loan mortgage Idaho bank. 1990, defaulted real-estate taxes scheduled foreclosure sale. 3 day before sale, Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Code, 1101 et seq., District Idaho. reorganization plan depended "new value exception" absolute priority rule.1 moved suspend automatic stay imposed 362(a), arguing Bonner's unconfirmable matter law number reasons, including unavailability new exception. eventually motion, concluding exception had survived enactment Code. court stayed order pending an Bonner. reversed, re Partnership, 142 B.R. 911 (1992); took turn, but Appeals Ninth Circuit affirmed, (1993). 4 then petitioned certiorari. we petition, 510 ----, 114 681, 126 648 (1994), stipulated consensual reorganization, approval confirmation constituted Bancorp, our We set argument. 511 1367, 128 44 (1994). II 5 questions vacate, suggesting limitations conferred III, see Const., Art. 1, "may, at least some cases, prohibit act rendered moot." Brief 21 (emphasis original). 6 statute provides: 7 "The any other jurisdiction affirm, modify, aside reverse judgment, decree, lawfully brought remand cause direct entry appropriate order, require further proceedings be just circumstances." 2106. 8 Of course could authorize decide posed controversy. For purpose, must exist all stages Preiser Newkirk, 422 395, 401, 2330, 2334, 45 272 (1975); Mills Green, 159 651, 653, 16 132, 133, 40 293 (1895). But authority refute quite different notion take action regard piece litigation once determined requirements longer (or indeed never were) met. That proposition contradicted whenever holds district lacked first instance, vacates decision, remands directions dismiss. logic would hold powerless award costs, e.g., Heitmuller Stokes, 256 359, 362-363, 41 522, 523-524, 65 990 (1921), even enter dismissal. prescribe paralysis. "If [while review], consider require." 1001 (1944). As matters administration practice "reasonably ancillary primary, dispute-deciding function" courts, Chandler Judicial Council Tenth Circuit, 398 74, 111, 90 1648, 1667, 26 100 (1970) (Harlan, concurring denial writ), Congress us orders necessary final suit See Mistretta States, 488 361, 389-390, 109 647, 663-664, 102 714 (1989); id., 417, S.Ct., 678 (SCALIA, dissenting). 10 leading Inc., 36 (1950), sought injunctive monetary relief violation price control regulation. damages held abeyance decision injunction. prices complied regulations complaint. While States' pending, commodity issue decontrolled; request, moot, acquiesced. obtained dismissal ground res judicata, review ruling. protested unfairness according preclusive effect tried not. saw unfairness, reasoning asked dismissed. stated "[t]he established dealing way here direction dismiss." Id., 39, 106. explained "clears path future relitigation issues between eliminates prevented through happenstance." 40, 107. Finding "slept rights," 41, 107, affirmed. present agree decreed those whose is, words " 'prevented happenstance' "—that say, where presented "become unattributable parties." Karcher May, 484 72, 82, 83, 108 388, 391, 98 327 (1987). They unilateral prevailed lower court. contested settlement. centerpiece argument Munsingwear procedure already apply cases. Munsingwear's description "established practice" (the runs) drew distinctions categories cases; opinions later granting reiterated breadth rule, see, Great Western Sugar Nelson, 442 92, 93, 99 2149, 2150, 60 735 (1979) (per curiam ); specifically involved Lake Coal Roberts & Schaefer 474 120, 106 553, 418 (1985) ). 12 post-Munsingwear practice, cannot bear weight To begin with, portion Douglas' describing dictum; needful (at most) sought, necessarily granted. Moreover, itself acknowledged, U.S., n. 2, (in addition being unconsidered) entirely uniform, three having without within four Terms preceding Munsingwear. See, Schenley Distilling Corp. 333 878, 68 914, 92 1154 (1948) Nor uniform claims. Allen Pacific Dunlop Holdings, 1146, 127 454 (1994); Minnesota Newspaper Assn., Inc. Postmaster General, 998, 632, 766 St. Luke's Federation Nurses Health Professionals Presbyterian/St. Medical Center, 459 1025, 103 433, 74 522 (1982).2 decisions, both denying it, were per curiam, single supra, declined seems prime occasion invoking customary refusal bound dicta, McCray Illinois, 386 300, 312, 11, 87 1056, 1063, 18 62 (1967), skepticism towards dispositions reasoned consideration full opinion, Edelman Jordan, 415 670-671, 94 1347, 1359-1360, 39 662 (1974). Today examine more light shed adversary presentation. 13 treatment counsel against extending From beginning disposed manner 'most consonant justice' . view nature character conditions Hamburg-Amerikanische Packetfahrt-Actien Gesellschaft, 239 466, 477-478, 212, 216-217, 387 (1916) (quoting South Spring Hill Gold Mining Amador Medean 145 302, 921, 712 (1892)). condition 478, 217 (remanding because "the ends exact permitted stand fault [petitioner] there upon merits"); 362, 523-524 "without plaintiff error, defendant below, caus[ed] moot"). 14 reference "happenstance" understood allusion tradition A seeks adverse ruling, frustrated vagaries circumstance, ought fairness forced acquiesce judgment.3 216-217. same true below. Walling, 675, 828; Heitmuller, 523-524. unreviewable, simply unreviewed own choice. merely one application principle "[a] suitor's conduct relation hand disentitle him he seeks." Sanders 373 17, 83 1068, 1078, 148 (1963) (citing Fay Noia, 372 438, 822, 848, 837 (1963)). 15 these respects stands differently than if lacking failed all. (1987), two state legislators, acting their capacities presiding officers legislature, appealed invalidated constitutional grounds. jurisdictional statement legislators lost posts, successors office withdrew appeal. Holding want proper appellant, argued vacated noting "[t]his did parties. ended party—the [State] Legislature —declined pursue Accordingly, inapplicable case." Karcher, 391. So too here. true, course, mootness. Petitioner argues therefore fair respondent, distinguish prior ground. misconceives emphasis decisions. jointly responsible settling sense put them footing, needs that. burden, status quo demonstrate equivalent responsibility mootness, Petitioner's forfeiture constitutes failure equity makes decisive, whatever share mooting might been. 17 contemplate relief, holding account interest. "Judicial precedents presumptively correct valuable community whole. property private litigants unless concludes served vacatur." Izumi Seimitsu Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha Phillips Corp., 425, 428, 396 (1993) (STEVENS, prescribed primary route, right seek consequences judgments. allow steps off statutory employ secondary refined form collateral attack would—quite apart considerations parties—disturb system. establishes best demands "orderly procedure," honored; think conversely requires honored they can. advances meant systemic consented reversed often suspect, sort prophylactic error. inappropriate, basis assumptions about merits. Second, suggests "[v]acating leaving temporarily unresolved can facilitate ultimate resolution encouraging continued examination debate." 33. found, debate among sufficiently illuminates come additional intra-circuit far outweighed benefits flow questions. 19 justification urged facilitation resulting economies courts. availability filed), deter earlier stage. Some litigants, least, worthwhile roll dice rather settle court, appeals, if, only unfavorable outcome washed away settlement-related And achieved district-court level ordinarily much extensive find impossible assess holding, either way, frequency 20 involves appeals (with, consequential vacation underlying court), discuss relevance motions suggested freely granted, subject right. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Yanakas, 381, 384 (C.A.2 Obviously, affect Whether court's seizure consequence appellant's good luck bearing litigant abandoned If point proposed distinction judgments, right, likely overturned hence less valid: again assert inappropriateness disposing beyond consider, estimates regarding described paragraphs above points out, reversal rate grants (a precondition vacatur) over 50%—more double Jill E. Fisch, Rewriting History: Propriety Eradicating Prior Decisional Law Through Settlement Vacatur, 76 Cornell L.Rev. 589, 595, 25 (1991) studies). say produced fashion. described, determination one, favor course. clear discussion, vacatur—which neither diminishes voluntariness abandonment nor alters discussed. absence of, existence circumstances, request instructions pursuant Federal Rule Civil Procedure 60(b). 22 23 denied. 46. 24 so ordered. syllabus part prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Lumber 200 321, 337, 282, 287, 50 499. "allows shareholders corporation bankruptcy obtain reorganized debtor exchange capital contributions objections class creditors payment claims." 899, 901 express Solicitor brief support petitioner, apparently unvacated 46.1 predecessor), "all agre[e]." mentioned Munsingwear; nor, add, commend it. thus dictum happenstance sufficient correctly applied another matter. became enforced annulled Executive Order. Fleming 162 F.2d 125, (C.A.8 1947). conclusion repeal administrative fairly attributed Branch litigates name States.

Category: 8