Legal Opinion
United States v. Raymond P. Novak
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 22, 2007No. 04-55838PublishedCited by 125 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BERZON, Circuit Judge.
We are asked to determine whether— and if so, under what circumstances — a criminal defendant’s retirement benefits are available as a source of funds to compensate crime victims. Answering these questions requires reconciling two federal statutory schemes — one, the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act of 1996 (“MVRA”), Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1227, governing the payment of restitution to crime victims, and the other, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461,1 regulating private pension plans. Underlying each statute is a…
2Cases cited65 opinions
- Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Cannon v. University of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Heckler v. ChaneySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Morton v. MancariSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by125 opinions
- DirecTV, Inc. v. Hoa HuynhCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Drakes Bay Oyster Company v. Sally JewellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Consejo De Desarrollo Economico De Mexicali, A.C. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Dunn & Black, P.S. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Erica Harzewski, on Their Own Behalf and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Guidant CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007
120 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.