Rep. No. 91–1444 (part I), 91st Cong., 2d Sess. 81–85 (1970). Under the common law, in a criminal forfeiture pro- ceeding the defendant was apparently entitled to no- xxxx, trial, and a special jury finding on the factual is- sues surrounding the declaration of forfeiture which followed his criminal conviction. Subdivision (c)(2) pro- vides for notice. Changes in rules 31 and 32 provide for a special jury finding and for a judgment authorizing the Attorney General to seize the interest or property forfeited. NOTES OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON RULES—1979 AMENDMENT The amendment to rule 7(c)(2) is intended to clarify its meaning. Subdivision (c)(2) was added in 1972, and, as noted in the Advisory Committee Note thereto, was ‘‘intended to provide procedural implementation of the recently enacted criminal forfeiture provision of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970, Title IX, § 1963, and the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, Title II, § 408(a)(2).’’ These provi- sions reestablished a limited common law criminal for- feiture, necessitating the addition of subdivision (c)(2) and corresponding changes in rules 31 and 32, for at common law the defendant in a criminal forfeiture pro- ceeding was entitled to notice, trial, and a special jury finding on the factual issues surrounding the declara- tion of forfeiture which followed his criminal convic- tion. Although there is some doubt as to what forfeitures should be characterized as ‘‘punitive’’ rather than ‘‘re- medial,’’ see Note, 62 Cornell L.Rev. 768 (1977), subdivi- sion (c)(2) is intended to apply to those forfeitures which are criminal in the sense that they result from a special verdict under rule 31(e) and a judgment under rule 32(b)(2), and not to those resulting from a separate in rem proceeding. Because some confusion in this re- gard has resulted from the present wording of subdivi- sion (c)(2), United States x. Xxxx, 521 F.2d 406 (9th Cir. 1975), a clarifying amendment is in order. NOTES OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON RULES—1987 AMENDMENT The amendments are technical. No substantive change is intended. COMMITTEE NOTES ON RULES—2000 AMENDMENT The rule is amended to reflect new Rule 32.2, which now governs criminal forfeiture procedures. GAP Report—Rule 7. The Committee initially made no changes to the published draft of the Rule 7 amend- ment. However, because of changes to Rule 32.2(a), dis- cussed infra, the proposed language has been changed to reflect that the indictment must provide ...
Rep. No. 79-777, at 3 (1945) reprinted in 1945 U.S. Code Cong.
Rep. No. on Annex D-1 Mortgage Loan and Number as Identified on Annex A-1 Description of Exception
Rep. NO. 93-807, at 4726 (1974) (“A vested benefit is not to be forfeited because the employee later went to work for a competitor, or in some other way was considered ‘disloyal’ to the employer.”). To that end, the statute expressly provides: “A right to an accrued benefit derived from employer contributions shall not be treated 18In general, the term “vested” means “[having the character or given the rights of absolute ownership; not contingent; not subject to be defeated by a condition precedent.” A “vested” right is one that is “more than a mere expectation based on an anticipation of the continuance of an existing law; it must have become a title, legal or equitable, to the present or future enforcement of a demand, or a legal exemption from the demand of another.” BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY 1401 (5th ed. 1979). as forfeitable solely because plan amendments may be given retroactive application as provided in section 1082(d)(2).”19 29 U.S.C. § 1053(a)(3)(C). Health and life insurance benefits (“welfare benefits”) are treated slightly differently under ERISA. Unlike pension benefits, welfare benefits are not required to vest unless the plan contract so provides. See 29 U.S.C. § 1051(1); Xxxxxxx-Xxxxxx Corp. x. Xxxxxxxxxxxxx, 514 U.S. 73, 78 (1995); Xxxxx v. Fiatallis N. Am., Inc., 401 F.3d 779, 783 (7th Cir. 2005). Welfare benefits may, accordingly, vest when employers negotiate privately with their employees. See Xxxxxxx v. CNA Fin. Corp., 375 F.3d 623, 632 (7th Cir. 2004) (holding that “if ERISA welfare benefits vest at all, they do so under the terms of a particular contract” (citation omitted)). Through the written instrument required by 29 U.S.C. § 1102(a)(1), “the parties are free to subject such welfare benefits to vesting requirements not provided by ERISA, or they may reserve the power to terminate such plans . . . by private design, as set out in plan documents.” Xxxx x. Chromalloy Am. Corp., 877 F.2d 598, 603 (7th Cir. 1989) (citing Xxxxxx x. Xxxxx Farm Equip. Co., 788 F.2d 1186, 1193 (6th Cir. 1986)); see also Xxxxxxx v. Wheelabrator Corp., 993 F.2d 603, 605 (7th Cir. 1993); Xxxx v. United Dominion Indus., Inc., 951 F.2d 806, 814 (7th Cir. 1992). Of particular importance in these circumstances are the terms of the ERISA plan; “because vested benefits are forever unchangeable, there is a presumption against vesting if the plan language is silent.” Xxxxx x. Xxxxx Co., 622 F.3d 730, 735 (7th Cir. 2010). But this presumption applies only when the plan’s ...
Rep. NO. 94-686, at 6 (1976), reprinted in 1976 U.S.C.C.A.N. 539, 543. 225H.R. REP. NO. 94-686 at 12, reprinted in 1976 U.S.C.C.A.N. 539, 549 (“The bill gives broad discre- tion to the petitioner and the court in developing and approving the plan.”). 226Pub. L. No. 94-260, 90 Stat. 315, 316 (1976) (amending former 11 U.S.C.); see H.R. REP. NO. 94- 686, at 8, reprinted in 1976 U.S.C.C.A.N. 539, 546 (“The bill grants the court . . . powers which a bankruptcy court has under Chapters X and XI, and under section 77, but which had not previously been granted under Chapter IX. The first is the power to permit the petitioner to reject executory contracts.”).
Rep. NO. 95-989, at 9 (1978) reprinted in 16 XXXX X. XXXXXXX & XXXXXX X. XXXXXXX, BANKRUPTCY REFORM ACT OF 1978: A LEGISLATIVE HISTORY (Xxxxxxx X. Xxxx & Co. 1979) (“Since [the 1976 Amendments] there have been no developments in municipal arrangement proceedings to re- quire any new revision of the law. Thus, the bill tracks the provisions of Public Law 94-260 with stylistic changes to conform to the title.”).
Rep. No. 29 -
Rep. No. 95-164, at 30 (1977), reprinted in 1977 U.S.C.C.A.N. 884. In 1980, Congress again affirmed the BPA Administrator’s broad authority to contract and settle claims according to section 2(f) of the Bonneville Power Act. This express affirmation is contained in section 9(a) of the Northwest Power Act. 16 U.S.C. § 839f(a). Section 9(a) of that Act states “[s]ubject to the provisions of this chapter, the Administrator is authorized to contract in accordance with section 2(f) of the Bonneville Project Act of 1937 (16 U.S.C. § 832a(f)).” 16 U.S.C. § 839f(a). The legislative history of the Northwest Power Act confirms that section 9(a) “provides the Administrator the same general contracting authority for actions under the [A]ct as is provided under section 2(f) of the Bonneville Project Act.” S. Rep. No. 96-272, 96th Cong., 1st Sess. 33 (1979). In addressing section 9(a), Congressman Xxxxx made the following statement during floor debate:
Section 9(a) extends Bonneville’s existing special contracting authorities (and related expenditure authorities) contained in section 2(f) of the Bonneville Project Act to include the new contract and expenditure responsibilities provided in this legislation. In 1945, Interior Secretary Xxxxx in supporting the inclusion of 2(f)
Rep. NO. 38 - NON-RECOURSE EXCEPTIONS LOAN NO. 755440 - 2000 XXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXX EXPLANATION - The Mortgage Loan does not have a natural person liable for any of the recourse carve-outs. Continental Properties Company, Inc. guarantees the recourse carve-outs. LOAN NX. 000000 - XXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX CENTER EXPLANATION - The Mortgage Loan does not have a natural person liable for any of the recourse carve-outs. LOAN NO. 755148 - 436 NORTH BEDFORD DRIVE EXPLANATION - The Mortgage Loan does not have a natural person liable for any of the recourse carve-outs. G&L Realty Partnership, L.P. guarantees the recourse carve-outs. Also, Dxxxxx Xxxxxxxx and Sxxxxx Xxxxxxxx unconditionally guarantee the payment of the last $4,000,000 of the loan amount. SCHEDULE B List of Mortgagors that are Third-Party Beneficiaries Under Section 5.5 NONE SCHEDULE C List of Mortgage Loans Subject to Secured Creditor Impaired Property Policies NONE EXHIBIT 3 PRICING FORMULATION Bear $ 391,922,367 MSMC $ 351,499,709 WFB $ 478,057,911 PCFII $ 359,031,391 Entire Pool $1,580,511,378 EXHIBIT 4 BXXX OF SALE
