Joseph F. and Caroline Enos - Page 19

                                       - 19 -                                         
         of a third party, upon which the Commissioner had levied to                  
         satisfy a tax liability of the taxpayer before the taxpayer                  
         sought bankruptcy protection.  In Phelps v. United States, supra             
         at 377, the Supreme Court stated in dictum5 that “The levy,                  
         therefore, gave the United States full legal right to the $38,000            
         levied upon as against the claim of the petitioner receiver.”                
         In In re Pittsburgh Penguins Partners, supra at 1302, the Court              
         of Appeals for the Third Circuit, applying Phelps, held that a               
         levy deprived the bankruptcy court of summary jurisdiction over a            
         bank account and observed that the Court of Appeals did not need             
         to decide whether the levy transferred full title to the bank                
         account to the Commissioner.                                                 
              We disagree with petitioners’ contention that Phelps v.                 
         United States, supra, controls the outcome of the instant case.              
         In Phelps, the Supreme Court decided whether the bankruptcy court            
         had summary jurisdiction over an intangible, not whether the levy            
         satisfied the liability to the Commissioner.                                 











               5See United States v. Whiting Pools, Inc., 462 U.S. 198, 210           
          n.18 (1983).                                                                




Page:  Previous  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011