Skip to content
Try for free
Back to judgment

Citation network

Patterson Vs. Shumate

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 15, 1992

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

39 entries 2 linked 37 unlinked
Show
  1. Toibb Vs. Radloff US Supreme Court · Jun 13, 1991
  2. Union Bank Vs. Wolas US Supreme Court · Dec 11, 1991
  3. U.S. 753 (1992) October Term, 1991 Syllabus Patterson, Trustee V. Shumate
    Search
  4. c)(2) exclusion to restrictions on transfer that are enforceable only under state spendthrift trust law. Union Bank v. Wolas
    Search
  5. Roy v. Creasy
    Search
  6. embraced only state law, not federal law such as ERISA. Creasy v. Coleman
    Search
  7. estate.1 II A In our view, the plain language of the Bankruptcy Code and ERISA is our determinant. See Toibb v. Radloff
    Search
  8. Velis v. Kardanis
    Search
  9. Shumate v. Patterson
    Search
  10. In re Lucas, 924 F.2d 597 (CA6) (same), cert. denied sub nom. Forbes v. Holiday
    Search
  11. Motor Carrier Audit & Collection Co. v. Lighting
    Search
  12. law, including federal law such as ERISA. We must enforce the statute according to its terms. See United States v. Ron
    Search
  13. Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. United
    Search
  14. with prevailing interpretations of that phrase as it appears elsewhere in the Code. See Morrison-Knudsen Constr. Co. v. Director
    Search
  15. alienation of pension benefits, declining to recognize any implied exceptions to the broad statutory bar. See Guidry v. Sheet
    Search
  16. would disqualify the plan from taking advantage of the preferential tax treatment available under ERISA. See McLean v. Central
    Search
  17. United States v. Ron
    Search
  18. Davis v. Michigan
    Search
  19. contrary to the result reached above. See Consumer Product Safety Comm'n v. GTE
    Search
  20. ensures that the treatment of pension benefits will not vary based on the beneficiary's bankruptcy status. See Butner v. United
    Search
  21. quoting Lewis v. Manufacturers
    Search
  22. to recognize any exceptions to ERISA's antialienation provision outside the bankruptcy context. See Guidry v. Sheet
    Search
  23. Nachman Corp. v. Pension
    Search
  24. uniform national treatment of pension benefits. See Fort Halifax Packing Co. v. Coyne
    Search
  25. subsection-at-a-time approach, when interpreting another provision of this very statute earlier this Term. See Dewsnup v. Timm
    Search
  26. Syllabus Patterson, Trustee V. Shumate
    Search
  27. Roy v. Creasy
    Search
  28. ERISA. Creasy v. Coleman
    Search
  29. See Toibb v. Radloff
    Search
  30. Forbes v. Holiday
    Search
  31. See United States v. Ron
    Search
  32. the Code. See Morrison-Knudsen Constr. Co. v. Director
    Search
  33. See Guidry v. Sheet
    Search
  34. ERISA. See McLean v. Central
    Search
  35. See Consumer Product Safety Comm'n v. GTE
    Search
  36. See Butner v. United
    Search
  37. Lewis v. Manufacturers
    Search
  38. See Fort Halifax Packing Co. v. Coyne
    Search
  39. Term. See Dewsnup v. Timm
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales