Florida Department of Revenue v. Piccadilly Cafeterias, Inc.
Supreme Court of the United States
1Dissent
Justice Breyer, with whom Justice Stevens joins,
dissenting.
The Bankruptcy Code provides that the “transfer” of an asset “under a plan confirmed under section 1129 of this title, may not be taxed under any law imposing a stamp tax or similar tax.” 11 U. S. C. § 1146(a) (2000 ed., Supp. V) (previously § 1146(c)) (emphasis added). In this case, the debtor’s reorganization “plan” provides for the “transfer” of assets. But the “plan” itself was not “confirmed under section 1129 of this title” (i.e., the Bankruptcy Judge did not formally approve the plan) until after the “transfer” of assets took…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Robinson v. Shell Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Dolan v. United States Postal ServiceSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Toibb v. RadloffSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Dole Food Co. v. PatricksonSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. 203 North LaSalle Street PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.