In Re Kincaid

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an ERISA plan was not self-settled even though funded by the debtor/employee’s voluntary contributions on the grounds that, because the contributions were made by payroll deductions, “the amount contributed never belongs to the employee”
• holding ERISA’s saving clause applies in a conflict with the Bank- ruptcy Act of 1978
• noting, according to its interpretation, that the ERISA saving clause “expressly prohibits ERISA preemption of other federal laws”
• no Supreme Court case contradicts Daniel's holding that ERISA trusts must look to state spendthrift law for protection in bankruptcy
• nature and extent of property of the estate concerns the 23 administration of the estate and is a core proceeding under 24 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(A)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).