Legal Document

540 U.S. 443 KONTRICKv.RYAN. No. 02-819. Supreme Court of United States. Argued November 3, 2003. Decided January 14, 2004. A creditor in Chapter 7 liquidation proceedings has "60 days after the first date set for meeting creditors" to file a complaint objecting debtor's discharge. Fed. Rule Bkrtcy. Proc. 4004(a). The bankruptcy court may extend that period "for cause" on motion "filed before time expired." 4004(b). Reinforcing 4004(b)'s restriction extension 4004(a) deadline, 9006(b)(3) allows enlargement "the taking action" under "only extent and conditions stated [that rule]," i. e., only as permitted by On April 4, 1997, petitioner Kontrick filed petition. After gaining three successive extensions from Bankruptcy Court, respondent Ryan, Kontrick's creditor, 13, 1998, Ryan alleged had transferred property, within one year filing his petition, with intent defraud creditors, therefore did not qualify discharge 11 U. S. C. §§ 727(a)(2)-(5). an amended May 6, leave court, but without seeking or court-approved extension. particularity fraudulently money wife, removing own name family's once-joint checking account, then continuing regularly deposit salary checks into which wife routinely paid family expenses (the "family-account" claim). June 10, answer raise untimeliness family-account claim; merits, admitted transfers account denied violated § 727(a)(2)(A). In response Ryan's summary judgment motion, appended statement material facts, cross-moved strike portions filings, ask complaint's allegations. February 25, 2000, awarded claim, concluding was entitled because were made at least Ryan. moved reconsideration. For time, urged powerless adjudicate claim. containing observed, untimely Rules (b) 9006(b)(3). Those rules, maintained, establish mandatory, unalterable limit kind called "jurisdictional." reconsideration entered final judgment, holding 4004's complaint-filing instructions are "jurisdictional," waived right assert failing squarely point reached merits objections District sustained denial discharge, Seventh Circuit affirmed. Both courts relied decisions sister Circuits timeliness provisions issue Held: debtor forfeits rely 4004 if does Rule's limitation reaches creditor's objection Pp. 452-460. (a) Only Congress determine lower federal court's subject-matter jurisdiction. Const., Art. III, 1. so, pertinent here, instructing "objections discharges" "[c]ore proceedings" courts' 28 157(b)(2)(J). build constraints statutory authorization. Rather, applicable contained prescribed pursuant 2075. Such rules "do create withdraw jurisdiction." Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. Kroger, 437 365, 370. As 9030 states, "shall be construed jurisdiction courts." deadlines claim-processing do delineate what cases competent adjudicate. Although now concedes those properly labeled "jurisdictional" sense describing jurisdiction, he maintains have same import governing litigant generally lack any civil action. Mansfield, L. M. R. Swan, 111 379, 382. Similarly, urges, challenge proceedings, even initially appeal certiorari. equation advances overlooks critical difference between rule inflexible rule. Characteristically, cannot expanded parties' litigation conduct; rule, other hand, party's application, can nonetheless forfeited party asserting waits too long point. 452-456. No reasonable construction complaint-processing would allow situated is defeat late, litigated lost case merits. relevant this case, 9006(b)(3), include, among their primary purposes, affording affirmative defense outside limits. It uncontested urges nothing occurring thereafter counts, Rules' prescriptions unalterable, allowing no recourse equitable exceptions. This however, involves tolling equity-based exception. Neither claim nor anytime circumstances — otherwise qualifying him sole question whether until adjudicated words, how afforded linger proceedings? followed proper path key question. noted bars must raised responsive pleading. See Civ. 8(c) (made adversary 7008(a)). An include inadvertently omitted defense, amend "of course" passed, "leave [to amend] shall freely given when justice so requires." 15(a) 7015). failed pleading complaint. addition, delete certain items but, far litigation, Ordinarily, it included answer. 7012(b) (Fed. 12(b)-(h) apply proceedings). 12(h)(2) (3) prolong life defenses, them. Even based could equated "failure state upon relief granted," raised, latest, "at trial merits." 12(h)(2). preserved post-trial. 12(h)(3). resistance order. 456-460. 295 F. 3d 724, GINSBURG, J., delivered opinion unanimous Court. 1 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR SEVENTH CIRCUIT. 2 E. King Poor argued cause petitioner. With briefs Kimball Anderson, Michael J. Stepek, Laura D. Cullison. 3 James Figliulo respondent. brief H. Bowhay, A. Pollard, G. Eric Brunstad, Jr. 4 Kent Jones States amicus curiae urging affirmance. Solicitor General Olson, Assistant Attorney McCallum, Deputy Clement, William Kanter, Robinson.* 5 JUSTICE GINSBURG 6 concerns duration object ground out time. Under That extended matter us pleading, objected debtor, promptly move dismiss plea impermissibly late. decided, should refused reconsideration, urge plea. prescription, maintains, dispositive whenever proceedings. Rejecting characterization, below held prescription invoked upset adjudication We agree Affirming Appeals Circuit, we hold 8 * qualifies order discharging debts satisfies 727(a) Code. 727(a).1 granted frees all existing commencement proceeding than obligations 523 Code excepts 727(b).2 9 opposed trustee, creditor. 727(c)(1). Adjudication discharg[e]," provided, proceedin[g]" courts. statute, specifies Instead, controlling Federal Procedure, specifically, 10 part, states: "[A] later 60 creditors." 4004(b), provides: "[T]he [Rule allows] discharge" 4004(b).3 II petitioner, Dr. Andrew Kontrick, Respondent, Robert major former associate cosmetic plastic surgery practice, original debts. App. Pet. Cert. 40. 12 ibid., particularized violation 727(a)(2)(A) regard: Debtor alleged, Id., 52-53.4 13 answered 1998. His "did [the family-account] claim," Brief Petitioner 4; violating March 1999, parties engaged acrimonious discovery, judgment. Local 402(M) (Bkrtcy. Ct. ND Ill. 1994) instructs, "a facts [he] contend[ed] there [was] genuine issue." cross-moved, August filings. 14 sought deletion "new allegations," allegations making appearance submissions 402(M), accompanying exhibits, corresponding memorandum. Motion Strike Response [Ryan's] Statement Facts 402 N 97 B 10353 Ill.), pp. 2, 5, 26. absent complaint, id., 3-4, response, instead, line 402(N), addressed substance He off observed "over four years bankruptcy." 13. also acknowledged that, thereafter, "deposited paycheck way always done." Ibid. 15 ruled cross-motions, granting part strike, awarding dismissing remaining claims. used its baseline; struck "allegations [that] complaint." 47; see 48-50. Homing deposits removed name, concluded property "to hinder, delay [creditor] Ryan." 55. course conduct, coupled testimony,5 concluded, sufficed prove 727(a)(2) (described supra, 447, n. 1). 55, 64. Accordingly, held, 16 lacked over 71. insisted, untimely. Governing 448, jurisdictional label relating 17 8, five later. 18 Court's decision denying 25-38. turn, affirmed re 724 (2002). here jurisdictional." 733 (citing Benedict, 90 50, 54-55 (CA2 1996), Farouki Emirates Bank Int'l, Ltd., 244, 248 (CA4 1994)); accord, 31-32. agreed 19 found papers opposing placed 3d, 735. according Appeals, apparently accepted filed; baseline new supporting further commented "[t]he policy expeditious administration matters finality hardly fostered requiring consider already adjudicated." 20 certiorari view division "jurisdictional,"6 538 998 (2003), affirm Circuit.7 III 21 respect Title (Judiciary Judicial Procedure); cataloging core authorized adjudicate, inter alia, 157(b)(1) (b)(2)(I) (J). Certain contain built-in constraints. example, 157(c)(1) addresses de novo district review findings conclusions noncore proceedings; provision confines "matters timely specifically objected."8 conferring contains condition. Section 157(b)(2)(J) instructs 22 practice procedure title 11." 2075; cf. 2072 (similarly providing Court-prescribed "rules procedure" appeals). "[I]t axiomatic" such 370 (1978). 9030's forerunner counterpart Civil 82 similarly "These . ." Wright, Miller, Marcus, Practice Procedure 3141, 484-485 (2d ed. 1997) ("Rule states [the] important principle" merely prescribe method exercised."); Schacht States, 398 58, 64 (1970) ("The procedural adopted orderly transaction business jurisdictional. ."). short, 23 much common ground. contend timing affect Tr. Oral Arg. (acknowledging "[t]his deal subject jurisdiction"); 9-10 (explaining counsel word "jurisdiction" "as shorthand" indicate nonextendable limit). 24 Courts, including true, been less meticulous regard; they more occasionally term describe emphatic court. "Jurisdiction," aptly "is many, meanings." Steel Citizens Better Environment, 83, (1998) (internal quotation marks omitted). described 6(b), enlargement, correspondingly, Criminal 45(b), extending "mandatory Robinson, 361 220, 228-229 (1960). But Carlisle 517 416, 419-433 (1996) (holding prosecutor's objection, grant postverdict acquittal day allowed Crim. 29(c); characterize "jurisdictional"); Taylor Freeland Kronz, 503 638, 642-646 (1992) (similar ruling regarding 4003(b)). "[C]lassify[ing] prescriptions, rigid ones, heading `subject jurisdiction'" confounding. Carlisle, S., 434 (GINSBURG, concurring). Clarity facilitated litigants delineating classes (subject-matter jurisdiction) persons (personal falling adjudicatory authority. 25 Though action, highest appellate instance. 382 (1884) (challenge stage sua sponte); Capron Van Noorden, Cranch 126, 127 (1804) (judgment loser successfully diversity Court); 12(h)(3) ("Whenever appears suggestion lacks matter, action.").9 Just 10-11 (a "so it's proceeding"); (same); Reply 16, argument longevity limits e. g., Poskanzer, 146 B. 125, 131 (NJ 1992); Rinde, 276 330, 333 RI 2002); Barley, 130 66, 69 Ind. 1991); Kirsch, 65 297, 300, 302 1986)). 26 IV 27 turn back case. jurisdiction,10 serve purposes. First, inform pleader, Second, instruct discretion motions complaint-filing-time enlargements. Third, afford third office Rules. "equitable exceptions." 16-18. Whether Rules, despite strict limitations, softened grounds11 reach.12 Amicus Curiae ("[M]uch [Kontrick's] actually directed presented case," alterable "`equitable exceptions imported rules.'" (quoting 13)); 40 ("Whether court] late isn't [Ryan not] claimed [in case] groun[d] enlarging presented."). 29 assume, arguendo, asserted prevailed litigation. question, event, "whether restrictions th[e] `emphatic form'" preclude (citation See, (upholding one-day-late 29(c)); Taylor, 4003(b)); 222-230 45(b)). Here, merits.13 30 agree, 734-735. Time bars, noted, 7008(a)).14 15(a); 7015 P. applies proceedings."). 31 earlier recounted, 449-450, 32 proceedings."); 5A Wright 1347, p. 184 1990) ("A unless protected successful invocation liberal amendment 15."). provisions. And, explained, 452-456, sum, 33 34 reasons stated, 35 Affirmed. Notes: Henry Sommer National Association Consumer Attorneys reversal. 727(a), debtor,inter alia: (1) individual; (2) has, concealed, transferred, destroyed estate (A) preceding (B) during case; books records; (4) knowingly false oath (C) attempted obtain acting forbearing act, (D) withheld documents financial affairs; (5) explain loss deficiency assets. 727(a)(1)-(5). categorizes nondischargeable. See,e. 523(a)(1) (certain tax customs duty"); 523(a)(2)(A) obtained "false pretenses, representation, actual fraud"); 523(a)(5) spouse, child debtor" "support spouse child"); 523(a)(6) (debts "willful malicious injury debtor"). 4007(c), essentially complaints targeting particular debt 523(c). Seesupra, 2. 4007(c) tracks (b), lists well enlarge themselves]." Because practical identity 523(c), considered construing determining delineated forfeited. 730, (CA7 2002) Santos, 112 1001, 1004, (BAP CA9 1990)). took bank some prior check continued one-year specified (describedsupra, 33, 52-53. pre-bankruptcy deposition, prevent creditors attaching funds. 53; 727-728 Compare,e. Coggin, 1443, 1450-1451 (CA11 (referring 4004(b) "jurisdictional requirement" bar"), with, 54 1996) ("time imposed jurisdictional"). oral argument, suggested noting implicitly invited dismissal 5; ("Kontrick many untimely, sufficiently claim."). notation agreed, fell short 735; 72. disturb determination. train our attention presented: "[W]hether deadline mandatory thus waived." note, too, "relate back" neither 729, aired Provisions similar order, constraints, 2401(b) (tort against forever barred" appropriate agency two accrues" action begun six months notice presented"); 2107(a) ("Except provided section, bring decree suit nature appeals filed, thirty entry decree.") attacked collaterallyDes Moines Nav. Iowa Homestead Co., 123 552 (1887); Restatement (Second) Judgments (1980). Like 45(b) Appellate 26(b), 9006(b) modeled 6(b). Advisory Committee's Note 9006 ("Subdivision patterned 6(b) 26(b) P." (emphasis original)). Lower divided (Rules "are defenses"); (same conclusion 4007(c)); 4004), e.g., Alton, 837 2d 457, 459 1988) (per curiam) (Rule confers object, bar date); Neeley Murchison, 815 345, 346-347 (CA5 1987) (same). Nor anything read suggest stipulate assertion time-barred claims accommodation operate detriment creditors. Dollar, 257 364, 366 SD Ga. 2001) ("Although defendant significantly benefit allowance [reflecting pre-trial agreement substitute claim,] defendant's harmed."). Government notes, accurately forfeiture rather waiver." asAmicus 7, 5. jurists often use words interchangeably, "forfeiture failure make right[;] waiver `intentional relinquishment abandonment known right.' Olano, 507 725, (1993) Johnson Zerbst, 304 458, 464 (1938))." (some internal fuller detail, 4004(d) provides "[a] commenced governed Part VII these rules." includes 7008(a), "Rule proceedings."

Classification Label: 7