Bonney Motor Express, Inc. v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that Social Security benefits were “entitlements” rather than contractual rights, and denying recoupment against postpetition benefits
• holding that the counterclaim must be so closely related that it “is essentially a defense”
• stating that “pre-petition claims against the debtor cannot be setoff [sic] against post-petition debts to the debtor.”
• stating that recoupment is appropriate where “the creditor’s claim against the debtor arises from the same transaction as the debtor’s claim ... [and] is essentially a defense to the debtor’s claim against the creditor rather than a mutual obligation.”
• declining to construe the recoupment doctrine so broadly as to run afoul of Social Security’s “primary purpose” to provide “income security”
• declining to construe the recoupment doctrine so broadly as to run afoul of Social Security’s “primary purpose” to provide “income security”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).