Ralph L. Carman v. Ron Parsons, as Tr. of Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 624 Vacation Fund, 789 F.2d 1532 (11th Cir. 1986). · Go Syfert
Search
Ralph L. Carman v. Ron Parsons, as Tr. of Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 624 Vacation Fund, 789 F.2d 1532 (11th Cir. 1986). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
13 citation events (11 in the last 25 years) across 7 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Elijah Thomas v. Pilgrim Pride Corporation (ca11, 2024-06-21)
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Elijah Thomas v. Pilgrim Pride Corporation (2×) also: Cited "see"
11th Cir. · 2024 · confidence medium
We have held that 26 U.S.C. § 6332 (e)—then codified as § 6332(d)—“exempts any ‘person’ in possession of property of a tax- payer subject to a tax levy from liability to that person for surren- dering or paying the property to the IRS.” Carman v. Parsons, 789 F.2d 1532, 1534 (11th Cir. 1986) (concluding, as a matter of law, that the trustees of an ERISA plan were “immune from liability under ERISA by virtue of the protections of . . . § 6332(d)”).
cited Cited as authority (rule) ROCHA JAMARILLO v. GILES
M.D. Ga. · 2024 · confidence medium
Mack v. Alexander, 575 F.2d 488, 489 (5th Cir. 1978);16 see Carman v. Parsons, 789 F.2d 1532, 1534 (11th Cir. 1986).
cited Cited as authority (rule) OLDAKER v. GILES
M.D. Ga. · 2024 · confidence medium
Mack v. Alexander, 575 F.2d 488, 489 (5th Cir. 1978);13 see Carman v. Parsons, 789 F.2d 1532, 1534 (11th Cir. 1986).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Brewer v. Commissioner, Internal Revenue
S.D. Ala. · 2006 · confidence medium
To the extent that any of plaintiff's claims are asserted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , this court holds that § 1983 is not a proper jurisdictional basis for a suit against the United States or the IRS because this section is intended to allow a plaintiff to recover for violations of his or her constitutional rights when the violation is committed by a person acting under color of “state law and do[es] not apply when the defendants are acting under color of Federal Law.” See Carman v. Parsons, 789 F.2d 1532, 1534 (11th Cir.1986); Seibert v. Baptist, 594 F.2d 423 (5th Cir.1979) (rev’d …
cited Cited as authority (rule) Louis Segal v. Commissioner of IRS
11th Cir. · 2006 · confidence medium
See 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ; Carman v. Parsons, 789 F.2d 1532, 1534 (11th Cir.1986).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In Re Kmart Corp.
Bankr. N.D. Ill. · 2003 · confidence medium
The benefit must be “an actual, concrete benefit for the estate before a claim is allowable ... as an administrative expense.” Id. (quoting In re Subscription Television of Greater Atlanta, 789 F.2d at 1532).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In Re Kmart Corp.
Bankr. N.D. Ill. · 2003 · confidence medium
Rather, the benefit must be “an actual, concrete benefit for the estate before a claim is allowable ... as an administrative expense.” Id. (quoting In re Subscription Television of Greater Atlanta, 789 F.2d at 1532).
discussed Cited "see" Felicia H. Watkins v. Ann Willis
11th Cir. · 2023 · signal: accord · confidence high
Neither §§ 1983 or 1341, however, apply to issues relating to an IRS tax levy because “these statutes provide a remedy for depri- vation of rights under color of state law and do not apply when the defendants are acting under color of federal law.” Mack v. Alexan- der, 575 F.2d 488, 489 (5th Cir. 1978); accord Carman v. Parsons, 789 F.2d 1532, 1534 (11th Cir. 1986); Beale, 461 F.2d at 1138 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Thomas v. Pilgrim Pride Corporation - Payroll Officer
S.D. Ga. · 2023 · signal: see also · confidence medium
Aug. 18, 2005) (emphasizing “that an employer that complies with a Notice of Levy issued by the IRS is immune from suit by the employee as to any claim that arises from compliance with the levy”); Liebig v. Kelley-Allee, 923 F. Supp. 778, 781 (E.D.N.C. 1996) (granting defendant’s motion to dismiss “because § 6332 grants absolute immunity to the [defendant] for its compliance with the I.R.S. levy”); see also Carmon v. Parsons, 789 F.2d 1532, 1534 (11th Cir. 1986) (holding that, under 26 U.S.C. § 6332 , trustees of union were immune from liability to member for honoring tax lien); Sa…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Glen R. Ramsey v. California Field Iron Workers Vacation Trust Fund Helen Arena Debra Vahe Doug Fonton Ron Smith United States of America
9th Cir. · 1992 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Carman v. Parsons, 789 F.2d 1532 (11th Cir.1986) (vacation fund trust and its trustees immune from liability by virtue of § 6332(d) (now (e)) when they transferred plaintiff's funds to the IRS pursuant to tax levies).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ralph L. CARMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Ron PARSONS, as Trustee of Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 624 Vacation Fund, Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
85-3841.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
May 27, 1986.
789 F.2d 1532
W. Eric Venable, Raymond T. Elligett, Jr., Tampa, Fla., for defendants-appellees.
Roney, Hatchett, Henderson.
Cited by 9 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM:

Ralph Carman brought this lawsuit against the trustees of the Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 624 Vacation Fund because they paid funds held in the Vacation Fund on Carman’s behalf to the Internal Revenue Service pursuant to two tax levies for $538.92 and $700.64, respectively. Car-man alleged that the trustees were not required to transfer the funds to the IRS, that the trustees violated Carman’s rights under ERISA, and that the trustees deprived him of property by paying the funds to the IRS. The district court granted the trustees’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under either 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 or under 29 U.S.C.A. § 1132 (the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) (ERISA)).

[*1534] 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 provides “a remedy for deprivation of rights under col- or of state law and does not apply when the defendants are acting under color of federal law.” Mack v. Alexander, 575 F.2d 488, 489 (5th Cir.1978). The trustees here were complying with federal law in honoring the tax liens. 26 U.S.C.A. § 6332(d) exempts any “person” in possession of property of a taxpayer subject to a tax levy from liability to that person for surrendering or paying the property to the IRS. The vacation fund trust and its trustees plainly are “persons” subject to the payment requirements and protection of section 6332. The definitions section of the Internal Revenue Code includes “an individual, a trust, estate, partnership, association, company or corporation” within the definition of person unless “otherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatible with the intent” of the applicable provision. 26 U.S.C.A. § 7701(a)(1). The fact that section 6332(e) defines the word “person” to “include” an officer or employee of a corporation or partnership does not limit the meaning of person, but merely makes clear that those people are subject to the levying requirements of section 6332(a).

A number of courts specifically have found that the trustees of a vacation trust are “persons” within the meaning of section 6332(d). See United States v. Dreier, 307 F.Supp. 810, 812 (S.D.N.Y.1969); Johnson v. United States, 566 F.Supp. 1012, 1014 (M.D.Fla.1983).

We hold that as a matter of law the trustees are immune from liability under ERISA by virtue of the protection of 26 U.S.C.A. § 6332(d).

AFFIRMED.