Professional Membership
Bankruptcy | Case Law | Sovereign Immunity
SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY--STATE AND FEDERAL
Central Virginia Community College v. Katz, 546 U.S. 356, 126 S.Ct. 990, 163 L.Ed.2d 945 (2006)
Preference action against state agencies is not barred by sovereign immunity, a finding that
does not hinge on the validity of 11 U.S.C. § 106(a).
Tennessee Student Assistance Corp. v. Hood, 541 U.S. 440 (2004)
Exercise of in rem jurisdiction to discharge a student loan does not infringe sovereign
immunity.
In re Balser, 327 F.3d 903 (9th Cir 2003), cert. denied, 124 S.Ct. 2159 (2004)
United States trustee is immune from suit if acting in his official capacity based on acts
conducted within the course and scope of his employment.
In re Bliemeister, 296 F.3d 858 (9th Cir. 2002)
State waived sovereign immunity where it failed to raise it until after filing an answer and
arguing a summary judgment motion.
In re Harleston, 331 F.3d 699 (9th Cir. 2003)
State waived sovereign immunity by filing proof of claim. Waiver extended to suits
involving same transaction or occurrence, such as this one, which sought a declaration that a debt
was discharged, even though proof of claim sought secured status.
In re Franceschi, 268 B.R. 219 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 2001), aff’d, 43 Fed.Appx. 87 (9th Cir. 2002)
Action for declaratory and injunctive relief properly dismissed on sovereign immunity
grounds as to state bar, and on Younger abstention grounds as to the state bar's chief trial counsel.
In re Ellett, 254 F.3d 1135 (9th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1127 (2002)
1) “...[W]e hold that a bankruptcy court's discharge order is binding on a State, despite the
State's election not to share in the recovery of the bankruptcy estate's assets by filing a proof of
claim.”
2) ...[A] discharge order can be enforced against a state tax official in an action for
prospective injunctive and declaratory relief under the Ex Parte Young doctrine.”
In re Lazar, 237 F.3d 967 (9th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 992 (2001)
1) “...[W]e hold today that when a state or an “arm of the state” files a proof of claim in a
bankruptcy proceeding, the state waives its Eleventh Amendment immunity with regard to the
bankruptcy estate's claims that arise from the same transaction or occurrence as the state's claim.”
2) California Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund is an “arm of the state.”
In re Jackson, 184 F.3d 1046 (9th Cir. 1999)
FTB waived sovereign immunity by filing proof of claims.
In re Black, 222 B.R. 896 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1998)
Bankruptcy court erred in denying motion for default judgment and ordering prove-up
hearing after appellate panel had determined that evidence was sufficient to prevail on dispositive
issue.
In re Lapin, 226 B.R. 637 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1998)
California Franchise Tax Board had sovereign immunity against bankruptcy court’s
sanction order arising from board’s attempts to collect delinquent taxes from discharged debtor.
In re White, 139 F.3d 1268 (9th Cir. 1998)
Filing of claim waived Indian tribes sovereign immunity
In re H.P.A. Assoc., 191 B.R. 167 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1995)
Current case law from the circuit courts and the Supreme Court indicates that Congress
acted within its plenary Article I powers to amend §106 of the Bankruptcy Code in order to
abrogate the state’s sovereign immunity as to specific Code sections. At least three of these
sections were pled by the trustee in the complaint to recover a payment made to EDD from H.A.’s
escrow account. Therefore, EDD’s sovereign immunity defense was unavailable.
Doe v. U.S., 58 F.3d 494 (9th Cir. 1995)
As a matter of law, for purposes of waiver of sovereign immunity and setoff under 11
U.S.C. §106 all agencies of the United States, except those acting in some distinctive private
capacity, are a single governmental unit.
In re Vanguard Mfg. Co., 145 B.R. 644 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1992)
Accepting postpetition payments insufficient to constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity.
In re Town & Country Homes Nursing Services, Inc., 112 B.R. 329 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1990),
aff’d, 963 F.2d 1146 (9th Cir. 1991)
No sovereign immunity under 106(a) where government offset -- deemed to file informal
proof of claim.
In re Pearson, 917 F.2d 1215 (9th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 503 U.S. 918 (1992)
U.S. immune from money damages under 362.
In re Bulson, 117 B.R. 537 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 1990), aff’d, 974 F.2d 1341 (9th Cir. 1992)
IRS not immune from damages for violating automatic stay.
Hoffman v. Conn. Dept of Income Maint., 492, U.S. 96, 109 S.Ct. 2818 (1989)