Latest Case: United States v. Clark (Criminal Law)

Why the Supreme Court was Right Last Week to Deny Review of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Decisions Handed Down Prior to the 2020 Election

VIKRAM DAVID AMAR, JASON MAZZONE

Illinois Law dean Vikram David Amar and professor Jason Mazzone argue that the U.S. Supreme Court correctly denied review last week of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decisions handed down before the 2020 election. Dean Amar and Professor Mazzone explain why the majority denied review and point out that the dissenting opinions unwittingly demonstrate the rightness of the majority.

Read More

United States v. Clark

Docket: 19-10186

Opinion Date: March 4, 2021

Judge: Gregg Costa

Areas of Law: Criminal Law

Defendant pleaded guilty to health care fraud after operating a chiropractic clinic that fraudulently billed insurance companies for services he performed without a license. Defendant was sentenced to 41 months' imprisonment and ordered to pay the defrauded insurance companies $514,576.29 under the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act (MVRA). The Act generally allows the government to garnish any of the defendant's property to satisfy a restitution order. The district court issued writs of garnishment for accounts defendant maintains with brokerage firms and life insurance companies. Applying de novo review, the Fifth Circuit agreed with the Sixth Circuit that the child-support exemption only applies to money akin to salary and wages—meaning amounts received directly for labor such as "bonuses, tips, commissions, and fees." Because this does not describe defendant's retirement accounts, the court affirmed the judgment garnishing those accounts.