Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 7 views

    Petty Motor Company v. United States, 475 U.S. 1056 (1986)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of certiorari in a case where the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a U.S. Marshal conducting a judicial foreclosure sale constitutes "seizing or levying" under federal law. Justice White dissented from the denial of certiorari, noting that three other circuit courts had held that costs could not be taxed in cases involving judicial foreclosure sales under the same federal statute. Justice White believed the Supreme Court should grant certiorari to resolve this conflict between the circuit courts.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as COURT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Petty Motor Company v. United States, 475 U.S. 1056 (1986)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of certiorari in a case where the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a U.S. Marshal conducting a judicial foreclosure sale constitutes "seizing or levying" under federal law. Justice White dissented from the denial of certiorari, noting that three other circuit courts had held that costs could not be taxed in cases involving judicial foreclosure sales under the same federal statute. Justice White believed the Supreme Court should grant certiorari to resolve this conflict between the circuit courts.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1986-03-03 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 475 U.S. 1056 Docket: 85-798

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    COURT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of certiorari in a case where the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a U.S. Marshal conducting a judicial foreclosure sale constitutes "seizing or levying" under federal law. Justice White dissented from the denial of certiorari, noting that three other circuit courts had held that costs could not be taxed in cases involving judicial foreclosure sales under the same federal statute. Justice White believed the Supreme Court should grant certiorari to resolve this conflict between the circuit courts.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as COURT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as court, pdf, or txt
    7 views2 pages

    Petty Motor Company v. United States, 475 U.S. 1056 (1986)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of certiorari in a case where the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a U.S. Marshal conducting a judicial foreclosure sale constitutes "seizing or levying" under federal law. Justice White dissented from the denial of certiorari, noting that three other circuit courts had held that costs could not be taxed in cases involving judicial foreclosure sales under the same federal statute. Justice White believed the Supreme Court should grant certiorari to resolve this conflict between the circuit courts.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as COURT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as court, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    475 U.S.

    1056
    106 S.Ct. 1284
    89 L.Ed.2d 591

    PETTY MOTOR COMPANY


    v.
    UNITED STATES.
    No. 85-798

    Supreme Court of the United States


    March 3, 1986

    On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for
    the Tenth Circuit.
    The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.
    Justice WHITE, with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE joins, dissenting.

    In this case the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held that as
    a matter of federal law a United States Marshal's conducting a judicial
    foreclosure sale constitutes "seizing or levying" within the meaning of 28
    U.S.C. 1921.* As the Government concedes, this decision conflicts with the
    decisions of three Courts of Appeals that have held that costs could not be
    taxed under 1921 in cases involving judicial foreclosure sales. See Travelers
    Insurance Co. v. Lawrence, 509 F.2d 83 (CA9 1974); James T. Barnes & Co. v.
    United States, 593 F.2d 352 (CA8 1979); Federal Land Bank of St. Paul v.
    Hassler, 595 F.2d 356 (CA6 1979). I would grant certiorari to resolve this
    conflict.

    Title 28 U.S.C. 1921 provides in relevant part:


    "Only the following fees of United States marshals shall be collected and taxed
    as costs, except as otherwise provided:
    *****

    "For seizing or levying on property (including seizures in admiralty), disposing


    of the same by sale, setoff, or otherwise and receiving and paying over money,
    commissions of 3 per centum on the first $1,000 of the amounts collected and
    11/2 per centum on the excess of any sum over $1,000."

    You might also like