Legal Opinion
Wojchowski v. Daines
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided August 2, 2007No. Docket 06-3373-cvPublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JOSÉ A. CABRANES, Circuit Judge.
This appeal concerns the scope of the “antiattachment provision” of the Social Security Act (the “Act”), 42 U.S.C. § 407(a). See Wash. State Dep’t of Soc. & Health Servs. v. Guardianship Estate of Keffeler, 537 U.S. 371, 379, 123 S.Ct. 1017, 154 L.Ed.2d 972 (2003) (describing § 407(a) as the Act’s “antiattachment provision”). Section 407(a) states in relevant part that “none of the moneys paid or payable or rights existing under this sub-chapter shall be subject to execution, levy, attachment, garnishment, or other legal process.” 1 In Robbins v. DeBuono, 218…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Goldberg v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- McCarthy v. Dun & Bradstreet Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
- Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Washington State Department of Social & Health Services v. Guardianship Estate of KeffelerSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Philpott v. Essex County Welfare BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- John Doe v. University of the SciencesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2020
- Camarillo v. Carrols Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
- Bankruptcy Services, Inc. v. Ernst & Young (In Re CBI Holding Co.)Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
- Adams v. ZarnelCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2010
- Doscher v. Sea Port Group Securities, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2016
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.