Patterson v. Shumate

Patterson v. Shumate

A 1992 court case in the United States holding that assets one holds in a pension or other investment vehicle on which transfer is restricted may not be surrendered in bankruptcy. That is, these assets may not be liquidated and distributed to creditors.
References in periodicals archive ?
Hendon case--the second most important case in history with regard to the protection of retirement assets (after the landmark Patterson v.
Supreme Court ruling that has protected retirement plan assets for the past 12 years is Patterson v.
Earlier, the bankruptcy court for the Southern District of Ohio had held that IRC section 403(b) plans (for the husband and wife) were "ERISA-qualified" as defined by the Supreme Court in Patterson v.
Morrison, PC, an employee benefits law firm that specializes in ERISA retirement plans, says, "The legal issue raised in Yates' appeal to the Supreme Court is whether the protections of Patterson v.
Prior to the Supreme Court's decision in Patterson v.
Similarly, there should be no preemption issue where the deferred compensation plan is subject to and complies with the anti-alienation provision of ERISA [sections] 206(d)(1), because the assets of such a plan should be excluded from the bankruptcy estate pursuant to Bankruptcy Code [sections] 541(c)(2) and Patterson v.
In spite of the [RS manual changes, taxpayer representatives should be aware of the recent Supreme Court decision in Patterson v.