U.S. Code » Title 45 » Chapter CHAPTER 16— REGIONAL RAIL REORGANIZATION › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER VII— PROTECTION OF EMPLOYEES

45 U.S.C. § 797d

Election and treatment of benefits

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 45 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Election(1) Any employee who accepts any benefits under an agreement entered into under section 797 11 See References in Text note below. of this title or a termination allowance under section 797a of this title, shall, except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, be deemed to waive any employee protection benefits otherwise available under any other provision of law or any contract or agreement in effect on August 13, 1981, except benefits under sections 797b and 797c of this title, and shall be deemed to waive any cause of action for any alleged loss of benefits resulting from the provisions of or the amendments made by the Northeast Rail Service Act of 1981.(2) Nothing in paragraph (1) of this subsection shall affect the right of any employee described in such paragraph to benefits under the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 [45 U.S.C. 231 et seq.] or the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act [45 U.S.C. 351 et seq.].(b) Treatment of benefitsAny benefits received by an employee under an agreement entered into pursuant to section 797 1 of this title and any termination allowance received under section 797a of this title shall be considered compensation solely for purposes of—(1) the Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 (45 U.S.C. 231 et seq.); and(2) determining the compensation received by such employee in any base year under the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (45 U.S.C. 351 et seq.).(Pub. L. 93–236, title VII, § 705, as added Pub. L. 97–35, title XI, § 1143(a), Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 664.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 797 of this title, referred to in subsecs. (a)(1) and (b), was repealed by Pub. L. 99–509, title IV, § 4024(c), Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1904, effective on the sale date (Apr. 2, 1987).

The Northeast Rail Service Act of 1981, referred to in subsec. (a)(1), is subtitle E (§§ 1131–1169) of title XI of Pub. L. 97–35, Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 643. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1101 of this title and Tables.

The Railroad Retirement Act of 1974, referred to in subsecs. (a)(2) and (b)(1), is act Aug. 29, 1935, ch. 812, as amended generally by Pub. L. 93–445, title I, § 101, Oct. 16, 1974, 88 Stat. 1305, which is classified generally to subchapter IV (§ 231 et seq.) of chapter 9 of this title. For further details and complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Codification note set out preceding section 231 of this title, section 231t of this title, and Tables.

The Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act, referred to in subsecs. (a)(2) and (b)(2), is act June 25, 1938, ch. 680, 52 Stat. 1094, which is classified principally to chapter 11 (§ 351 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 367 of this title and Tables.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1984–1989 · leading case: Carol M. Herbert & Henry W. Herbert v. United States, 850 F.2d 32 (2d Cir. 1988).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Carol M. Herbert & Henry W. Herbert v. United States, 850 F.2d 32 (2d Cir. 1988). · cites it 5× “The government contends on appeal that neither the statutory language of 45 U.S.C. § 797d(b) (1982) nor the relevant legislative history supports the district court’s conclusion that the lump sum separation allowance paid to appellee Henry Herbert is exempt from federal income…”
Sutherland v. United States, 664 F. Supp. 207 (W.D. Pa. 1987). · cites it 5× “The defendant claims that this position is supported by the legislative history behind 45 U.S.C. § 797d. Moreover, the defendant *210 asserts that the Internal Revenue Code, applicable Treasury Regulations, and case law interpreting the Code provide further support for the…”
Herbert v. United States, 662 F. Supp. 573 (S.D.N.Y. 1987). · cites it 4× “" 45 U.S.C. § 797d(a), 20 C.F.R. § 395.3 (c)(3)(ii), as discussed more fully below.”
John Roberts Martin Shirley Mae Martin Bernard J. Spanski & Margaret L. Spanski v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 877 F.2d 449 (6th Cir. 1989). “We note, however, that the two Courts of Appeals which have considered the issue agree with the Tax Court that 45 U.S.C. § 797d(b) does not exclude the payments from taxable gross income.”
Sutherland v. Egger, 865 F.2d 56 (3rd Cir. 1989). · cites it 4× “Taxpayers then instituted this suit in the district court for the Western District of Pennsylvania alleging that their termination benefits were specifically excluded from their gross income for tax purposes by 45 U.S.C. § 797d(b), which provides: (b) Treatment of benefits Any…”
Sutherland v. Egger, 605 F. Supp. 28 (W.D. Pa. 1984). “, 45 U.S.C. § 797d(b), specifically excludes the severance payments from gross income.”
Slattery v. United States, 16 Cl. Ct. 79 (Ct. Cl. 1988). “This was based on his interpretation of the following language found in 45 U.S. C. § 797d(b) (1982): [A]ny termination allowance received under section 797a of this title [section 702 of the Act] shall be considered compensation solely for purposes of— (1) the Railroad…”
Kelly v. United States, 703 F. Supp. 55 (N.D. Ill. 1989). “45 U.S.C. § 797d(b) (emphasis added). Plaintiff submits that the emphasized language exempts Title VII benefits from taxation under the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.”
Steffen v. Consol. Rail Corp., 690 F. Supp. 1054 (Regl. Rail Reorg. Act 1988). “and shall be deemed to waive any cause of action for any alleged loss of benefits resulting from the provisions of or the amendments made by [NRSA] 45 U.S.C. § 797d(a)(1) (emphasis added); see also Benefit Schedule § 202(d).”
— 45 U.S.C. § 797d(a) — 1 case
Herbert v. United States, 662 F. Supp. 573 (S.D.N.Y. 1987). “" 45 U.S.C. § 797d(a), 20 C.F.R. § 395.3 (c)(3)(ii), as discussed more fully below.”
— 45 U.S.C. § 797d(a)(1) — 1 case
Steffen v. Consol. Rail Corp., 690 F. Supp. 1054 (Regl. Rail Reorg. Act 1988). “and shall be deemed to waive any cause of action for any alleged loss of benefits resulting from the provisions of or the amendments made by [NRSA] 45 U.S.C. § 797d(a)(1) (emphasis added); see also Benefit Schedule § 202(d).”
— 45 U.S.C. § 797d(b) — 8 cases
Carol M. Herbert & Henry W. Herbert v. United States, 850 F.2d 32 (2d Cir. 1988). “The government contends on appeal that neither the statutory language of 45 U.S.C. § 797d(b) (1982) nor the relevant legislative history supports the district court’s conclusion that the lump sum separation allowance paid to appellee Henry Herbert is exempt from federal income…”
Sutherland v. United States, 664 F. Supp. 207 (W.D. Pa. 1987). “The defendant claims that this position is supported by the legislative history behind 45 U.S.C. § 797d. Moreover, the defendant *210 asserts that the Internal Revenue Code, applicable Treasury Regulations, and case law interpreting the Code provide further support for the…”
Herbert v. United States, 662 F. Supp. 573 (S.D.N.Y. 1987). “" 45 U.S.C. § 797d(a), 20 C.F.R. § 395.3 (c)(3)(ii), as discussed more fully below.”
John Roberts Martin Shirley Mae Martin Bernard J. Spanski & Margaret L. Spanski v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 877 F.2d 449 (6th Cir. 1989). “We note, however, that the two Courts of Appeals which have considered the issue agree with the Tax Court that 45 U.S.C. § 797d(b) does not exclude the payments from taxable gross income.”
Sutherland v. Egger, 865 F.2d 56 (3rd Cir. 1989). “Taxpayers then instituted this suit in the district court for the Western District of Pennsylvania alleging that their termination benefits were specifically excluded from their gross income for tax purposes by 45 U.S.C. § 797d(b), which provides: (b) Treatment of benefits Any…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.