No. 22-1197
Jon Lawrence Frank v. United States
Response Waived
Experienced Counsel
Tags: 401k-plan consumer-credit-protection-act employee-retirement-income-security-act erisa garnishment lump-sum-distribution mandatory-victims-restitution-act restitution retirement-plan-benefits
Key Terms:
Arbitration ERISA SocialSecurity Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Arbitration ERISA SocialSecurity Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2023-09-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether ERISA precludes garnishment of 401(k) plan to satisfy restitution order
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, pursuant to which retirement plan benefits “may not be assigned or alienated,” 29 U.S.C. § 1056(d)(1), precludes the government from garnishing an individual’s 401(k) plan account to satisfy a restitution order under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act. 2. Whether a lump-sum distribution from a 401(k) plan account constitutes “earnings” subject to the 25 percent cap on garnishment under the Consumer Credit Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1672(a), 1673(a).
Docket Entries
2023-10-02
Petition DENIED.
2023-06-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-06-15
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2023-06-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 10, 2023)
2023-04-06
Application (22A876) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until June 7, 2023.
2023-04-04
Application (22A876) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from May 8, 2023 to June 7, 2023, submitted to The Chief Justice.
Attorneys
Jon Lawrence Frank
Patrick L. Bryant — Office of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
Patrick L. Bryant — Office of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent