By Katherine B. Brewer, Esq. (Westerville, OH) One of the first things we focus on in law school (other than the Rule Against Perpetuities, which always brings back fond memories), is that our clients come first. We learn the complexities of the law, memorize rule statements, and read thousands of pages of case law in order to learn how best...
Some Questions After Clark v. Rameker
Print This Article
Link to Post:
By William H. Brown, Adviser, Academy for Consumer Bankruptcy Education
In Clark v. Rameker, 134 S.Ct. 2242 (June 12, 2014), the Supreme Court held that an inherited IRA does not constitute a “retirement fund” within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3)(C). Since that Code section is identical to § 522(d)(12), inherited IRAs would not be exempt under the latter section either. Although the Court affirmed the Seventh Circuit’s decision, In re Clark, 714 F.3d 559 (2013), the unanimous opinion by Justice Sotomayor . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or sign in below:
Related Articles
Bifurcated Fees Under Examination
Motions to Extend or Impose the Automatic Stay
Passing of Retired Ohio Judge
Mary Ida Townson Appointed U.S. Trustee for Florida, Georgia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands
Critical Case Comment – Fair Discrimination: A Win/Win
It Takes a Village
NACTT 2024 Annual Roundtable
NDC Small Sponsorship Program
When Laws Collide, You Need the Right Word
Welfare Debt – A Study