Calcutt v. FDIC
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Calcutt v. FDIC and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Calcutt v. FDIC.
The Supreme Court reviewed a decision by the Sixth Circuit, which affirmed FDIC sanctions against a former bank CEO, Harry C. Calcutt, for mismanaging loans. The Court found that the Sixth Circuit erred by affirming the FDIC's decision on different legal grounds than those used by the agency. The case was remanded to the FDIC for reconsideration consistent with the Court's opinion.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Calcutt v. FDIC.
The Court held that the Sixth Circuit violated administrative law principles by affirming the FDIC's sanctions based on a different rationale than the agency's.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Calcutt v. FDIC. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Administrative Law is relevant to Calcutt v. FDIC
The case primarily deals with the limits of judicial review of agency decisions, emphasizing that courts must judge the propriety of agency action based on the grounds invoked by the agency.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)By affirming the FDIC's sanctions against petitioner based on a legal rationale different from the one adopted by the FDIC, the Sixth Circuit violated the 'fundamental rule of administrative law' that reviewing courts 'must judge the propriety of [agency] action solely by the grounds invoked by the agency.'
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Calcutt v. FDIC
The Court's decision focuses on the proper scope of judicial review of agency decisions, highlighting that courts should not substitute their judgment for that of the agency.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)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.'
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Calcutt v. FDIC
The case involves procedural due process in the context of agency decision-making and the requirement for proper procedures in judicial review.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The proper course, except in rare circumstances, is to remand to the agency for additional investigation or explanation.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Calcutt v. FDIC that support the summary and concepts above.
The Sixth Circuit violated the 'fundamental rule of administrative law' that reviewing courts 'must judge the propriety of [agency] action solely by the grounds invoked by the agency.'
The proper course, except in rare circumstances, is to remand to the agency for additional investigation or explanation.
The Sixth Circuit should have remanded the matter back to the FDIC for further consideration.