.jpg)
Longshoreman injury claim and 33 U.S.C. Section 916
Steve,
I just had the same question posed to me up here in Ventura. I agree with
your analysis, how did it go with the trustee? Did you use 704 or the
Federal exemption? Or both?
Best regards
Larry Webb
State Bar of California 229344
Central District California
"A Debt Relief Agency"
Larry@webbklaw. com
Law Offices of Larry Webb
484 Mobil Ste 43
Camarillo Ca 93010
P 805.987.1400
F 805.987.2866
C 805.750.2150
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
No experience to share with that issue, but your analysis seems solid.
On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Steven B. Lever wrote:
> **
>
>
> I have an injured longshoreman who has a claim under the federal version
> of their workers compensation statute. Since Im a Long Beach bankruptcy
> attorney I get a lot of longshoremen, but this is my first injured one in a
> long time. ****
>
> ** **
>
> I know I am probably better off taking the 704 exemptions that the 703
> since the former allows his eventual settlement or award to be exempt to
> the extent necessary for his and his spouses maintenance and support
> instead of the set figure of 703.****
>
> ** **
>
> However, Im wondering if the federal exemption 33 U.S.C. 916 is also
> applicable. The chapter is entitled: 33 USC Chapter 18 - LONGSHORE AND
> HARBOR WORKERS COMPENSATION.****
>
> ** **
>
> The subsection of the statute Section 916 reads: No assignment, release,
> or commutation of compensation or benefits due or payable under this
> chapter, except as provided by this chapter, shall be valid, and such
> compensation and benefits shall be exempt from all claims of creditors and
> from levy, execution, and attachment or other remedy for recovery or
> collection of a debt, which exemption may not be waived.****
>
> ** **
>
> So I think this applies to prevent the Trustee from considering this an
> asset, and I can claim it in *conjunction* with the 704 exemption.****
>
> ** **
>
> Any thoughts, comments or even better, experience with this 33 U.S.C.
> 916 would be much appreciated.****
>
> ** **
>
> Steve ****
>
> ** **
>
> Law Offices of Steven B. Lever****
>
> >** **
>
> > Steven B. Lever****
>
> >( Tel. (562) 436-5456 ext. 6470****
>
> >( Fax (800) 360-5161****
>
> >* sblever@leverlaw.com****
>
> > www.leverlaw.com****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
>
>
Kirk Brennan, esq.
California Law Office, P.C.
www.calibankruptcysite.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the
exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not
the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in
reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error,
please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this
message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive
attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this
message.
TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not
constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not
be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the
purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal
Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion
letters containing the signature of a director.
No experience to share with that issue, but your analysis seems solid.On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Steven B. Lever <sblever@leverlaw.com> wrote:
I have an injured longshoreman who has a claim under the federal version of their workers compensation statute. Since Im a Long Beach bankruptcy attorney I get a lot of longshoremen, but this is my first injured one in a long time.
However, Im wondering if the federal exemption 33 U.S.C. 916 is also applicable. The chapter is entitled: 33 USC Chapter 18 - LONGSHORE AND HARBOR WORKERS COMPENSATION.
Any thoughts, comments or even better, experience with this 33 U.S.C. 916 would be much appreciated.
Law Offices of Steven B. Lever
>> Steven B. Lever
>( Tel.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I have an injured longshoreman who has a claim under the federal version of their worker's compensation statute. Since I'm a Long Beach bankruptcy attorney I get a lot of longshoremen, but this is my first injured one in a long time.
I know I am probably better off taking the 704 exemptions that the 703 since the former allows his eventual settlement or award to be exempt to the "extent necessary for his and his spouse's maintenance and support" instead of the set figure of 703.
However, I'm wondering if the federal exemption 33 U.S.C. 916 is also applicable. The chapter is entitled: 33 USC Chapter 18 - LONGSHORE AND HARBOR WORKERS' COMPENSATION.
The subsection of the statute Section 916 reads: No assignment, release, or commutation of compensation or benefits due or payable under this chapter, except as provided by this chapter, shall be valid, and such compensation and benefits shall be exempt from all claims of creditors and from levy, execution, and attachment or other remedy for recovery or collection of a debt, which exemption may not be waived.
So I think this applies to prevent the Trustee from considering this an asset, and I can claim it in conjunction with the 704 exemption.
Any thoughts, comments or even better, experience with this 33 U.S.C. 916 would be much appreciated.
Steve
Law Offices of Steven B. Lever
>
> Steven B. Lever
>( Tel. (562) 436-5456 ext. 6470
>( Fax (800) 360-5161
>* sblever@leverlaw.com
> www.leverlaw.com
The post was migrated from Yahoo.