October Term 2017 · Docket 16-784

Does the bankruptcy safe harbor protect transfers to financial institutions even if the funds reach non-protected parties?

The dispute centers on whether a bankruptcy trustee can recover funds sent to a financial institution under a safe harbor provision.

Official caption
Merit Management Group, LP v. FTI Consulting, Inc.
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Walsh argued that Congress included intermediaries in the safe harbor from the start.

    Mr. Walsh stated that the relevant transfers involve financial institutions like Credit Suisse.

    Mr. Clement addressed the definition of a financial institution first.

    Mr. Clement then addressed the specific main legal question by the Court.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests the scope of a federal bankruptcy safe harbor. The provision shields certain financial transactions from being unwound by a bankruptcy trustee. The core legal question is whether this protection applies when the funds ultimately reach parties who do not qualify for the shield.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 6, 2017.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

The trustee wants to recover the funds for creditors.

The financial institution wants to keep the funds protected by the safe harbor.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

The trustee argues the safe harbor does not protect funds reaching non-protected parties.

The financial institution argues the safe harbor protects transfers to financial institutions regardless of the final recipient.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Sotomayor asked if the obligation issue is prospective.

Justice Ginsburg asked how either bank is at risk in this scenario.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the boundary of financial transaction protections in bankruptcy. It determines whether creditors can recover funds that passed through protected institutions. The outcome affects the stability of financial markets and the rights of bankruptcy estates.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON