Supreme Court to Hear Case on Whether Congress Intended all IRAs to be Exempt

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, June 7, agreed to hear an appeal of an Eighth Circuit decision holding that Individual Retirement Accounts are not exempt under Section 522(d)(10)(E) of the Code. The question presented has resulted in a three-way split among the courts of appeals -- a conflict acknowledged by the appeals court as they upheld a ruling denying the debtors' claimed exemption. The appeals court also felt constrained by Congress's ambiguity in the drafting of Section 408 of the Internal Revenue Code: "if Congress had intended all IRA's which qualify under Section 408 to be exemptible as a 'similar plan or contract', it would have been a very easy legislative task to have affirmatively accomplished." The case is Rousey v. Jacoway. Read the petition for cert here.

S. 2396 WOULD MAKE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE OPERATIONS AND
ADMINISTRATION OF THE FEDERAL COURTS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
S. 2396, the Federal Courts Improvement Act of 2004 was introduced in the Senate by Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.).

Bill Would Make It Easier to Transfer Venue
Senate bill 2396 (introduced by Sen. Hatch and others, see above) would amend Section 1412 of Title 28 to allow the court, on its own motion, to change venue, rather than only after a timely motion by a party in interest (Section 102 of bill). The bill (Federal Courts Improvement Act of 2004) would introduce a number of other changes to the administration of the federal courts. The bill has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Two other provisions (Sections 121-122) are aimed at limiting public access to sensitive commercial and financial information filed with the court, including personal identifying information such as social security numbers.

S. 153—Identity Theft Penalty Enhancement Act
This Senate bill would enhance penalties for aggravated identity theft, adding specified terms of imprisonment to the terms already imposed for the underlying felonies. This bill, which has already passed the Senate, also would prohibit a court from placing any person convicted of such a violation on probation, reducing any sentence for the related felony to take into account the sentencing imposed for such a violation, or providing for concurrent terms of imprisonment for a violation of the new Act and any other violation.

A companion bill, H.R. 1731, was favorably reported by the House Judiciary Committee in May.

H.R. 1768, The Multidistrict Litigation Restoration Act of 2004
This bill passed the House by a vote of 418 - 0 and is now pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee. The legislation is responsive to the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Lexecon, Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach, which held that statutory authority did not exist for a transferee judge, conducting pretrial proceedings, to transfer a case to his or her own district for a trial. H.R.1768 would amend the statute to allow a judge with a transferred case to retain it for trial or to transfer it to another district. Read More

Summary of the ABI Legislative Program Presented at the 2004 Annual Spring Meeting

• A presentation by Susan Jensen (Majority Counsel, House Judiciary Committee, Washington, D.C.) on the recently passed legislation affecting identity theft prevention and fair credit reporting. This bill is known as the National Consumer Credit Reporting System Improvement Act of 2003, and became Public Law No: 108-159, on Dec. 4, 2003. This legislation also makes improvements in consumer access to credit information. A topic of interest discussed during this presentation was the privacy regulations now being implemented in the clerk’s offices of U.S. Bankruptcy Courts across the nation.

• A presentation by Philip Corwin (Butera & Andrews, Washington, D.C.) and David Lachman (Staff Member, House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Washington, D.C.) on the current status of the bankruptcy reform legislation. The speakers discussed several scenarios that might develop in both the Senate and House that could impact the passage of a bankruptcy bill. The principal theme of this segment of the program was whether Congress would pass a major bill, a mini bill, or nothing at all.

The moderators for the Legislative Committee presentation were Judge David W. Houston III (U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of Mississippi) and Judge George C. Paine (U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Middle District of Tennessee).