whether-a-non-article-iii-bankruptcy-court-judge-can-exercise-judicial-power

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This appeal addresses a subtle yet important constitutional issue concerning the judicial power of a non-Article III bankruptcy court Judge. This important constitutional question should have been resolved in the landmark case of Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462, 481, 131 S.Ct. 2594, 180 L.Ed.2d 475 (2011). However, the Third Circuit’s decision did not follow the ruling in Stern in the instant case. While subtle, the importance of this constitutional issue was strongly emphasized by Chief Justice Roberts, when he cautioned all of us in Stern that “Ta] statute may no more lawfully chip away at the authority of the Judicial Branch than it may eliminate it entirely. ‘Slight encroachments create new boundaries from which legions of power can seek new territory to capture’ (Citation Omitted) ... we cannot overlook the intrusion: ‘legitimate and unconstitutional practices get their first footing in that way, namely, by silent approaches and slight deviations from legal modes of procedure.’ (Citation Omitted) We cannot compromise the integrity of the system of separation powers and the role of the Judiciary in that system, even with respect to challenges that may seem innocuous at first blush.” See, Id. Two questions are presented: 1. Whether or not a _ non-Article III Bankruptcy Court Judge can exercise judicial power to u determine a noncore proceeding where the final determination affects non-parties (the single sole member of the Debtor LLC and the non-party attorneys’ contractual rights) to the Debtor LLC’s bankruptcy proceedings without their consent by ordering the non-party attorney to disgorge the legal fees paid by the single sole member of the Debtor LLC, not paid by the estate, to the estate of the Debtor. 2. Whether or not Congress can enact Bankruptcy Code as the Third Circuit interpreted in the instant case that the bankruptcy court may order disgorgement of any payment made to an attorney representing the debtor in connection with a bankruptcy proceeding, regardless of the payment source, which is in conflict with Article III, §I, of the Constitution when Article III, §I, of the Constitution does not permit or allow a non-Article III Bankruptcy Court Judge to determine issues of non-core bankruptcy matters that encroach into the boundaries of the judiciary systems and invade the principal of separation of powers.