Richard Ware Levitt, Esq. v. David H. Brooks
669 F.3d 100
2d Cir.2012Background
- Brooks was represented by Levitt in a federal criminal case; after trial, Brooks stopped paying Levitt and owed $224,956.16.
- Brooks sought release of restrained government assets for post-trial costs and incurred further defense costs with substitute counsel.
- Levitt moved for withdrawal and for an order to remit $224,956.16 from forfeited bail funds or to compel Brooks to pay; Levitt also sought ancillary jurisdiction.
- District court opened a new civil docket and granted Levitt’s motion to compel payment under ancillary jurisdiction.
- Brooks challenged the district court’s ancillary jurisdiction, argued procedural defects under the Federal Rules, and raised constitutional defenses; Brooks did not contest the amount owed.
- The district court’s March 15, 2011 judgment affirming the fee-collection order is at issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ancillary jurisdiction over the fee dispute was proper | Ancillary jurisdiction empowered to resolve fee disputes related to ongoing action | Stein v. KPMG limits ancillary proceedings; jurisdiction lacking | Ancillary jurisdiction existed and was proper |
| Whether the district court complied with the Federal Rules in the fee proceeding | Court properly exercised ancillary jurisdiction and no formal complaint needed | Procedural missteps under Civil Procedure Rules | Issues forfeited; no reversible error on this point |
| Whether Brooks’ due process rights or right to a jury trial were violated | None shown; court afforded opportunity to be heard | Due process and jury rights infringed by lack of hearing/trial | No due process or jury-trial violation |
| Whether Brooks waived or forfeited arguments by not raising them below | Waiver should not bar resolution of issues raised on appeal | New arguments not preserved; review limited to preserved issues | Brooks forfeited many arguments; remaining claims meritless |
Key Cases Cited
- Garcia v. Teitler, 443 F.3d 202 (2d Cir. 2006) (ancillary jurisdiction to resolve fee disputes in criminal cases)
- Chesley v. Union Carbide Corp., 927 F.2d 60 (2d Cir. 1991) (ancillary jurisdiction enables administration of justice in main action)
- Novinger v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 809 F.2d 212 (3d Cir. 1987) (federal forum has vital interest in attorney-fee arrangements)
- Stein v. KPMG, LLP, 486 F.3d 753 (2d Cir. 2007) (distinguishes Garcia; fee disputes involving non-parties treated differently)
- Cluett, Peabody & Co., Inc. v. CPC Acquisition Co., Inc., 863 F.2d 251 (2d Cir. 1988) (non-exhaustive factors weigh in favor of ancillary jurisdiction)