Calcutt v. FDIC (598 U.S. 623)

U.S. Supreme Court · decided May 22, 2023 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)

Citation
598 U.S. 623 · 143 S. Ct. 1317
Decided
May 22, 2023
Term
October Term 2022
Vote
9–0
Issue area
Economic Activity
Disposition
Reversed and remanded
Outcome
Petitioning party won
Ideological direction
Conservative

Opinion excerpt

Cite as: 598 U. S. ____ (2023) 1 Per Curiam SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES HARRY C. CALCUTT, III v. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT No. 22–714. Decided May 22, 2023 PER CURIAM. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) brought an enforcement action against petitioner, the for- mer CEO of a Michigan-based community bank, for mis- managing one of the bank’s loan relationships in the wake of the “Great Recession” of 2007–2009. After proceedings before the agency concluded, the FDIC ordered petitioner removed from office, prohibited him from further banking activities, and assessed $125,000 in civil penalties. Peti- tioner subsequently filed a petition for review in the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. That court determined that the FDIC had made two legal errors in adjudicating petitioner’s case. But instead of remanding the matter back to the agency, the Sixth Circuit conducted its own review of the record and concluded that substantial evidence sup- ported the agency’s decision. That was error. It is “a simple but fundamental rule of administrative law” that reviewing courts “must judge the propriety of [agency] action solely by the grounds invoked by the agency.” SEC v. Chenery Corp., 332 U. S. 194 , 196 (1947). “[A]n agency’s discretionary order [may] be…

Excerpt of a 13,667-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.

← Back to the decisions database