Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Schor
United States Supreme Court
478 U.S. 833 (1986)
Relevant factsFree
Schor (plaintiff) filed a complaint against broker Conti with the CFTC (defendant) for violations of federal commodities law, and Conti responded with a common-law counterclaim in the same CFTC reparations proceeding rather than filing it separately in court; the CFTC ruled for Conti on the counterclaim, and the court of appeals held that the CFTC's adjudication of a common-law counterclaim violated Article III.
IssueFree
Whether an agency necessarily violates Article III when it adjudicates state or federal claims willingly submitted by the parties for initial agency adjudication.