U.S. Code » Title 5 » Part PART III— EMPLOYEES › Subpart Subpart G— Insurance and Annuities › Chapter CHAPTER 84— FEDERAL EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER VI— GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

5 U.S.C. § 8470

Exemption from legal process; recovery of payments

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 5 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) An amount payable under subchapter II, IV, or V of this chapter is not assignable, either in law or equity, except under the provisions of section 8465 or 8467, or subject to execution, levy, attachment, garnishment or other legal process, except as otherwise may be provided by Federal laws.(b) Recovery of payments under subchapter II, IV, or V of this chapter may not be made from an individual when, in the judgment of the Office, the individual is without fault and recovery would be against equity and good conscience. Withholding or recovery of money paid under subchapter II, IV, or V of this chapter on account of a certification or payment made by a former employee of the United States in the discharge of his official duties may be made only if the head of the agency on behalf of which the certification or payment was made certifies to the Office that the certification or payment involved fraud on the part of the former employee.(Added Pub. L. 99–335, title I, § 101(a), June 6, 1986, 100 Stat. 577.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 72 cases (27 in the last 5 years), 1992–2026 · leading case: Alexander v. Washington Gas Light Co., 481 F. Supp. 2d 16 (D.D.C. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Alexander v. Washington Gas Light Co., 481 F. Supp. 2d 16 (D.D.C. 2006). · cites it 4× “; that WGL’s claims were barred by res judicata because of Plaintiffs bankruptcy proceedings; and that Plaintiffs sole existing property interests were exempt from legal process by 5 U.S.C. § 8470 and 10 U.S.C. § 1440 . Id.”
Anna Miller v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 449 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2006). · cites it 2× “Miller notes that decisions whether to invoke equitable waiver of the government’s right to recover overpayments, see 5 U.S.C. § 8470 (b) and 5 C.F.R. § 845.301 , are always renewable by the Board, even though the underlying obligation may not be related to a right or obligation…”
Evans v. Diamond, 957 F.3d 1098 (10th Cir. 2020). “5 U.S.C. § 8470 (a). This provision, coupled with the reasoning in Ridgway, is sufficient to support our conclusion that the Estate’s post-distribution claims are preempted.”
UNITED STATES of Am., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jack Curtis COMER, Defendant-Appellant, 93 F.3d 1271 (6th Cir. 1996). “5 U.S.C. § 8470 (a) (emphasis added). See also 5 U.”
Godbout v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 466 F.3d 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2006). · cites it 4× “Here, in OPM’s February 18, 2005, letter to Mr. Godbout addressing the discovery of the overpayment, OPM addresses the entire question neutrally: "An 06-3178 5 overpayment has resulted due to a delay in re-computing your annuity where the non- creditable military service was…”
McNeil v. United States, 78 Fed. Cl. 211 (Fed. Cl. 2007). “16, and explains that 5 U.S.C. § 8470 permits levies where “another Federal law provides specific authority to do so____” Id.”
King v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 730 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2013). · cites it 2× “Notwithstanding the transfer of funds to Diana, the Administrative Judge ruled that Kathryn was not entitled to a waiver of recovery of the overpayment because Kathryn had not demonstrated that OPM’s recovery of the overpayment would be against equity and good conscience as…”
Rubin v. the Islamic Repub. of Iran, 456 F. Supp. 2d 228 (D. Mass. 2006). “”); 5 U.S.C. § 8470 (a) ("An amount payable under subchapter II, IV, or V of this chapter is not assignable, either in law or equity, except under the provisions of section 8465 or 8467, or subject to execution, levy, attachment, garnishment or other legal process, except as…”
Byrum v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 618 F.3d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 2010). “In support, the Government cites 5 U.S.C. § 8470 (a), which provides that many benefits, including those at issue here, are not assignable except under certain exceptions.”
Gordon v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 689 F. App'x 977 (Fed. Cir. 2017). “§ 8346 (b); see also 5 U.S.C. § 8470 (b); 5 C.F.R. § 845.301 .”
Van Den Broek v. Tang, 88 Va. Cir. 65 (Fairfax Cir. Ct. 2014). · cites it 4× “§ 8401 , and FERSA’s anti-attachment provision, 5 U.S.C. § 8470 . However, because there is no binding precedent that discusses these provisions in FERSA, the Court must look to similar provisions in the Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance (“FEGLIA” or “FEGLI”), 5 U.”
Friedman v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 153 F. App'x 719 (Fed. Cir. 2005). · cites it 2× “” 5 U.S.C. § 8470 (b) (2000). In accordance with our conclusion regarding identical language in the Civil Service Retirement Act, this provision grants OPM discretion to determine whether to waive a repayment.”
Show all 72 citing cases →
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.