[PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 13 11 5

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNos . 1: 11 -cv -0 01 36 -CAP ; USBC 1 0- 74 11 9- W LH

Inre: LOU AN

N CASSELL, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Deb to r.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ ROBERT B. SILLIM AN, Ch ap te r 7 Tru st ee, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Pl ai nt iff - App el la nt , ve rs us LOU ANNCASSELL, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Defen dant- App el le e.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e North ern Dis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Au gu st3, 2 01 2) Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 1 of 23Befo re CARNES, M ARTIN, an d J ORDAN, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

CARNES, Ci rcu itJu dg e: Thi s i s anap pe al in a ba nkrupt cy cas e th atturn s o n t he in te rp ret at io n o f a Geo rg iast atut ory

pro vi si on ex em

pt in g c ert ai n a nn ui ti es fro m ba nkrupt cy

est at es . The qu es ti on s p res en te d a re s uf fic ie nt ly uns et tl ed , im

po rta nt , andli ke ly to re cu r th atwe be li ev e th e b es t co ur se is to cert ify the m to th e Geo rg iaSupr em e Co urt, whi chis th e o ne tru e an d fi na l ar bi te r of Geor gi a la w. See Mu ll an ey v. Wilb ur , 42 1 U.S. 6 84 , 69 1, 9 5 S .Ct. 1 88 1, 1 88 6 (1 97 5) (no ti ng th atth e Uni te d S ta te s Supr em e Co urt “ rep eat ed ly has he ldth atst at e co urts are t he ul ti m at e ex po si to rs of st at e la w”); Blu e Cro ss & Bl ue Sh ie ldof Al a., In c. v. Ni el se n, 1 16 F.3d14 06 , 14 13 (11 th Cir . 19 97 ) (“ The fin al arb it er o f st at e la w is th e st at e supr em e co urt . . . .”). I. Inlat e 2 00 8, Ca ss el l i nh eri te d $ 22 0,0 00 fro m he r au nt . At th atti m e, bo th Cas se ll an d h er wh ol ly owne d c om pany, J&L Arbo ris ts , LLC, were in so lv en t. Cas se ll was s ti ll ab le to pa y bo th he r pe rs on al de bt s an d t he co m pa ny’ s d eb ts as th ey cam e due , at l eas t fo r a wh il e. Afte r co ns ul ti ng wit h a tt orne y s an d acco un ta nt s, s he us edhe r $2 20 ,00 0 i nh eri ta nc e to pu rch as e a s in gl e-p rem iu m fix edan nu it y

on May 1, 20 09 . Cas se ll was 6 5 years o ldat t ha t t im e. Sh e b eg an 2 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 2 of 23rece iv in g m on th ly paym en ts of $ 1,3 89 .14 on Ju ne 1, 2 00 9, an d u nd er the an nu it y

co nt ractsh e is sch edul edto rece iv e th os e p aym en ts for th e res t o f he r li fe. The co nt ractals o g ua ran te es th e p aym en ts forten y ears reg ard le ss of wh enCas se ll di es . She de si gn at edhe r ch il dr enas the be ne fic iarie s o f th e p aym en ts if s he di es wit hi n t he ten -y ear g ua ran te e p eri od . On M ay 11 , 20 10 , a y ear a fte r sh e h adpu rch as edth e an nu it y , Cas se ll fil eda Ch ap te r 7 b an kr

up tc y pe ti ti on (as di d h er co m

pa ny). She i nc lu de d t he an nu it y as anass etin he r Sch edul e B d is cl os ur es , andinhe r Sch edul e C fi li ng sh e li st editas ex em ptpro pe rty un de r Ga. Co de Ann . § 4 4- 13 -1 00 (a)( 2) (E). ThatGeor gi a st atut ory pro vi si on pe rm it s a d eb to r to ex em ptfro m he r bankrupt cy

est at e

“ an nu it y ” p aym en ts if t he pa y m en ts are b ot h “ on acco un t o f . . . age” an d

“ reas on ab ly neces sa ry

forth e supp ort o f th e d eb to r.” Id . The tru st ee o bjec te d, co nt en di ng th atCas se ll ’s ann ui ty is n on ex em pt be cau se itdo es no t m eetth e requi rem en ts of t he st atut e. The tru st ee ar gu edth at th e wor d “ an nu it y ” in th e Geo rg iaex em pt io n s ta tu te ha s a s pe ci al m ean in g andno t ev ery in ve st m en t o r in su ran ce p ro du ctlab el edas a n a nn ui ty qua li fie s as on e u nd er th e st atut e. The t ru st ee as se rte d t ha t Ca ss el l’s an nu it y do es no t qua li fy

un de r Ga. Co de Ann . § 4 4- 13 -1 00 (a)( 2) (E) b ecau se : (1 ) Cas se ll pu rch as editwit h fu nd s s he in he rit edin st eadof wi th he r sa la ry or wa ge s; (2) sh e d idno t i nt en d fo r th e 3 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 3 of 23pa ym en ts to subs ti tu te forhe r wag es ; (3 ) sh e ex erci se d t oo m uc h c on tro l o ve r it ; an d (4 ) th e ci rcu m st an ces su gg es t s he pu rch as editas apre ba nkrupt cy pl an ni ng m eas ur e. Acco rd in g t o the tru st ee, the pa ym en ts Cas se ll rece iv es are n ot“ on acco un t o f . . . age” be cau se sh e ch os e to be gi n re cei vi ng th em imm ed ia te ly, an d th e fac t t ha t s he was 6 5 wh ensh e p ur ch as edth e an nu ity is no t en ou gh to m ak e th e pa ym en ts on acco un t o f ag e. Fin al ly, th e tr us te e arg ue d t ha t t he pa ym en ts are n ot

“ reas on ab ly neces sa ry ” fo r Cas se ll ’s supp ort b ecau se sh e is sel f-s uf fic ie ntan d was no t s up po rte d b y

he r au nt . The ba nkrupt cy

co urt h el d t ha t Ca ss el l’s an nu it y is an“ an nu ity ” wit hi n t he m ean in g o f th e Geo rg iaba nkrupt cy ex em pt io n s ta tu te . The co urt b as edth at co nc lu si on on fin di ng s t ha t: when Cas se ll pu rch as editsh e in te nd edforth e pa ym en ts sh e wou ldrece iv e to subs ti tu te forwage s; th e p aym en t o pt io n s he se le ct edrefl ect edhe r in te ntto ob ta in in co m e fo r th e dur at io n o f he r li fe; th e an nu ity was n otpre ba nkrupt cy

pl an ni ng ; an d s he di d n otha ve in ap pr op ria te co nt ro l o ve r th e co rp us . The co urt al so de ci de d t ha t t he pa ym en ts were “ on acco un t o f . . . age” du e to th e fac t t ha t s he ha d p ur ch as edth e an nu it y be cau se of he r ag e. The co urt d idno t d eci de whet he r th e p aym en ts were re as on ab ly ne ces sa ry forCas se ll ’s supp ort, b el ie vi ng th atitlac ke d s uf fic ie ntev id en ce t o

4 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 4 of 23m ak e th atde te rm in at io n. 1

The tru st ee ap pe al edth e b an krup tc y co urt’s o rd er t o t he di st ric t co urt, whi chals o c on cl ud edth atCas se ll ’s ann ui ty qua li fie d a s an “ an nu it y ” fo r th e pu rp os es of t he Geor gi a b an krup tc y ex em pt io n. The di st ric t co urt ag reedwit h t he ba nkrupt cy

co urt t ha t t he an nu it y

pa ym en ts are o n a cco un t o f Cas se ll ’s age be cau se he r ag e h adm ot iv at edhe r to bu y th e an nu it y . The di st ric t co urt af firm ed as to th e is su es th atth e b an krup tc y co urt h adad dr es se d b utrem an de d the cas e, le av in g i t fo r th e b an krup tc y co urt t o d eci de in th e fi rs t i ns ta nc e whe th er the an nu ity pa ym en ts are re as on ab ly neces sa ry forCas se ll ’s supp ort. In st eadof wa it in g t o l it ig at e th e rea so nabl y ne ces sary

is su e in th e ba nkrupt cy

co urt, t he tru st ee ap pe al edto th is Co urt, co nc ed in g t ha t t he an nu it y pa ym en ts are re as on ab ly neces sa ry forCas se ll ’s supp ort. App el la ntBr. 1 0. Th e 2
The ba nkruptcy court did rule, how ever , that any annuity pay ments that might be ma de 1 to Cassell’s children ( if her de ath occ urre d within ten y ear s of the purc hase da te) we re not exempt; as a result, the cour t ordere d Cassell to irrevoc ably designate the ba

nkruptcy estate instead of he r childre n as the re sidual benef iciary . That rulingis not invol ved in this appea l. Absent that conc ession, we might lack appe llate jurisdiction. In bankruptc y case s, we 2 have jur isdiction over only a fina l order of

the district court, see 28 U.S.C. § 158(d), which is an order that leave s only

“ministerial” duties for

the bankr uptcy court, see J ove Eng ’gv. I .R.S., 92 F.3d 1539, 1548 ( 11th Cir. 1996). I f the fa ctual re cord is not fully develope d or if ther e is “significant judicial a ctivity [for] t he bankr

uptcy court involvingconsidera ble discre tion,” In re TCLInvestors, 775 F .2d 1516, 1518–19 (11th Cir. 1985), the district cour t’s order is not final and we lack jurisdiction, id. at 1519. B eca use the trustee conce des that the pa y ments are rea sonably

nece ssary

for Casse ll’s support, the fac tual rec ord is complete a nd there is no “significant a ctivity

. . . involving conside rable discretion” f or the ba nkruptcy court to under

take. That make s the district court orde r final a nd g ives us appellatejurisdiction to review it. See 28 5 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 5 of 23tru st ee h an gs hi s ap pe al onth e co nt en ti on s t ha t Ca ss el l’s an nu ity is no t an

“ an nu it y ” wit hi n t he m ean in g o f th e Geo rg iaex em pt io n s ta tu te an d t ha t, ev enif i t is , th e an nu it y

pa y m en ts are n otm ad e “ on acco un t o f . . . age.”

II. W e rev ie w de n ov o t he leg al de te rm in at io ns of t he ba nkrupt cy co urt an d t he di st ric t co urt, In re Garn er, 6 63 F.3d12 18 , 12 19 (11 th Cir . 20 11 ), bu t we re vi ew on ly for cl ear e rro r th e b an krup tc y co urt’s fa ct fin di ng s, In re Mi tc he ll , 63 3 F .3d 13 19 , 13 26 (11 th Cir . 20 11 ). The p art y ob jecti ng to anex em

pt io n, h ere the tru st ee, b ears th e b ur de n o f sh owi ng th atth e ex em pt io n i s i m

pr op er. See Fed . R. Ban kr . P. 40 03 (c). The Ban krup tc y

Co de all ows a de bt orto ex em ptcert ai n p ro pe rty from

th e ba nkrupt cy

est at e, se e 1 1 U.S.C. § 52 2( b) (1 ), an d i t l is ts cat eg or ie s o f pr op ert y el ig ib le forex em

pt io n, s ee i d. § 52 2( b) (2 ), (d ). Ind iv idua l s ta te s, h owe ve r, m ay op t o utof t he ex em

pt io ns pro vi de d i n t he Ban krup tc y Co de an d p ro vi de th ei r own li stof e xe m

pt io ns . See i d. § 52 2( b) (2 ). Geor gi a is on e o f th e st at es th atha s d on e th at . See Ga. Co de Ann . § 4 4- 13 -1 00 . Cas se ll co nt en ds th athe r an nu it y pa ym en ts are ex em

ptfro m in cl us io n i n t he
U.S.C. § 158(d); In re Porto, 645 F .3d 1294, 1298–99 (11th Cir. 2011); J ove Eng ’g , Inc., 92 F .3d at 1548; In re TCL , 775 F.2d at 1518–19. 6

Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 6 of 23ba nkrupt cy

est at e u nd er thi s p ro vi si onof t he Geor gi a ex em pt io n s ta tu te : (a) . . . [A] ny deb to r who is a na tu ral pe rs on m ay ex em pt. . . fo r th e pu rp os es of b an krup tc y , th e fo ll owi ng pro pe rty:

. . . (2 ) The de bt or ’s rig htto rece iv e:

. . . (E) A pa ym en t und er a p en si on , ann ui ty, orsi m il ar p la n o r co nt racton acco un t o f il ln es s, d is ab il it y , dea th , age , or l en gt h o f se rv ic e, to th e ex te ntreas on ab ly neces sa ry forth e supp ort o f th e d eb to r an d a ny de pe nd en t o f th e d eb to r . . . . Id . § 4 4- 13 -1 00 (a)( 2) (E). To b e ex em ptun de r th atpro vi si on Cas se ll ’s ann ui ty m us t m eetth ree r equi rem en ts . Cf. Ro us ey v. J aco way , 54 4 U.S. 3 20 , 32 5– 26 , 12 5 S.Ct . 15 61 , 15 66 (20 05 ). Fir st , itm us t b e an “ an nu it y ” as th atterm is us edin th e Geo rg iast atut e. Ga. Co de Ann . § 4 4- 13 -1 00 (a)( 2) (E). Seco nd , th e an nu it y pa ym en ts to Cas se ll m

us t b e “ on acco un t o f . . . age.” Id. Th ird , th e p aym en ts 3
m us t b e “ reas on ab ly neces sa ry to th e supp ort o f th e d eb to r.” Id . Becau se th e tru st ee co nc ed es th atth e th irdrequi rem en t i s m et , we tu rnto th e o th er two. A. As fo r th e fi rs t re qu ire m en t, n ei th er p art y po in ts to an y

de ci si on s o f th e
The sec ond require ment actua lly is that the annuity

pay ments be “on a ccount of

illness, 3 disability , death, a g e, or le ngth of servic e,” G a. Code Ann. § 44- 13-100(a )(2) (E), but a g e is the only one of those that conce ivably fits Cassell’s situation.

7 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 7 of 23Geo rg iaco urts de te rm in in g e xa ct ly wha t an “ an nu it y ” is forpu rp os es of Ga . Cod e

Ann . § 4 4- 13 -1 00 (a)( 2) (E), an d we h av e fo un d n on e. So we lo okto ba si c pr in ci pl es of s ta tu to ry

co ns tru ct io n a ndde ci si on s an al y zi ng an al og ou s ex em pt io ns . St atut ory co ns tru ct io n u nd er Geo rg ialaw s ta rts wit h t he fam il ia r ru le th at we are r equi red“ to co ns tru e a s ta tu te acco rd in g t o i ts term s [and ] to gi ve word s th ei r pl ai n a ndord in ary m ean in g.” Sla km anv. Co nt ’l Cas . Co., 5 87 S.E.2d24 , 26 (Ga. 2 00 3) . The p la in m ean in g o f “ an nu it y ” is “ [a]n o bl ig at io n t o p ay a st at ed su m , us u[ al ly] m on th ly or an nu al ly, to a st at edreci pi en t.” Bl ack ’s Law Dict io na ry 10 5 (9 th ed . 20 09 ); s ee al so Nati on sB an k o f N.C., N.A. v. Var iabl e Ann ui ty L ife In s. Co ., 51 3 U.S. 2 51 , 25 5, 1 15 S.Ct . 81 0, 8 12 (19 95 ) (“ Ann ui ti es are co nt ract s un de r whi ch th e p ur ch as er m ak es on e o r m or e p rem iu m pay m en ts to th e is su er i n ex ch an ge fora se rie s o f pa ym en ts , whi ch co nt in ue eit he r fo r a fi xe d p eri odor f or th e li fe o f th e p ur ch as er o r a d es ig na te d b en efi ci ary. ”). A “ fix edan nu it y ” is “ [a]n an nu ity th atgu aran te es fix edpa ym en ts , eit he r fo r li fe o r fo r a s pe ci fie d p eri od .” Bl ack ’s Law Dict io na ry

10 5; see als o i d. (d efi ni ng “ an nu it y ” as alt ern at iv el y m ean in g “ a ri gh t, o fte n a cqui redun de r a l ife -in su ran ce co nt ract , to rece iv e fi xe d pa ym en ts pe rio di cal ly for a s pe ci fie d dur at io n” ). Oth er Geo rg iast atut es de fin e “ an nu it y ” in a si m il ar way. See, e.g ., Ga. 8 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 8 of 23Co de Ann . § 3 3- 28 -1 (1 ) (“ ‘Ann ui ty’ m ean s a c on tra ctby whi chon e p art y in return fo r a s ti pu la te d p aym en t o r pa ym en ts pro m is es to pa y pe rio di c in st al lm en ts fora st at edcert ai n p eri odof t im e o r fo r th e li fe o r li ve s o f th e p ers on or p ers on s sp eci fie d i n t he co nt ract .”); id . § 4 7- 2- 1( 3) (“ ‘Ann ui ty’ m ean s an nu al pa ym en ts for li fe d eri ve d fr om

th e acc um

ul at edco nt rib ut io ns of am em be r.”); id . § 4 7- 3- 1( 3) (s am e). Andat l eas t o ne Geor gi a ap pe ll at e d eci si on ha s d efi ne d “ an nu it y ” th e sa m e way in an ot he r co nt ex t. See W ol fe v . Brem an , 26 S.E.2d63 3, 6 37 (Ga. Ct . App . 19 43 ) (“ ‘Ann ui ty’ ha s b een de fin edin ge ne ral term s as tec hn ic al ly a y earl y pa ym en t o f certa in su m

or m on ey , gra nt edan ot he r in fee fo r li fe o r y ears , bu t i n br oa de r se ns e as fix edsu m grant edor b eque athe d andpa y ab le pe rio di cal ly, bu t no t n eces sa ril y

an nu al ly, subjec t t o s uc h s pe ci fic li m it at io ns as t o dur at io n a s gr an to r ordo no r m ay

lawf ul ly im po se .”). Whe n a na lyzin g t he an al og ou s fe de ral ex em pt io n s ta tu te , 11 U.S.C. § 52 2( d) (1 0) (E), th e Uni te d S ta te s Supr em e Co urt “ lo ok [ed ] to th e o rd in ary 4
The fe dera l exempti on states: 4 (d) The followingproper

ty may be exempted . . . :

. . . (10) The debtor’s right to re ceive

—

. . . 9 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 9 of 23m ean in g o f [the ] te rm [].” Rou se y , 54 4 U.S. at33 0, 1 25 S.Ct . at 1 56 8. Itde fin ed

anan nu it y

as “ anam ou ntpay ab le y earl y or a t o th er re gu la r in te rv al s fo r a certa in orun cert ai n p eri od(as fory ears , forli fe, o r in pe rp etui ty).” Id., 12 5 S .Ct. at15 69 (al te rat io n a ndqu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . It n ot edth atan nu it ie s d iff er fro m pe ns io n p la ns in th at“ [e]m pl oyers es tabl is h a ndco nt rib ut e to . . . pe ns io n p la ns . . . , where as anin di vi du al can est ab li sh an d c on tri bu te to anan nu it y on term s an d co nd it io ns he sel ect s.” Id . at 3 31 , 12 5 S .Ct. at15 69 . Anditreco gn iz edth at an nu it ie s d idno t “ ne ces saril y pro vi de [] reti rem en t i nc om e.” Id . Alth ou gh th e Co urt i n R ou se y

was i nt erp ret in g t he fed eral ex em pt io n s ta tu te in st eadof t he Geo rg iaon e, we m ay

co ns id er i ts st at em en ts on th e que st io n o f th e g en eral ly acce pt edor p la in m ean in g o f th e wor d “ an nu it y .” The tru st ee co nt en ds , ho wev er, tha t t he word“ an nu it y ” in th e Geo rg ia (E) a pay ment under a

stock bonus, pension, profitshar ing, a nnuity , or similar plan or contra ct on ac count of illness, disability , death, a g e, or le ng th of servic e, to the extent reasonably

nece ssary

for the suppor

t of the debtor a

nd any depende nt of the debtor, unless— (i) such pla

n or contra ct was e stablished by or under the auspice s of an insider tha t employed the de btor at the time the debtor’s rights under such pla n or contra ct arose ; (ii) such pa

y ment is on acc ount of ag e or le ng th of servic e; and (iii) such plan or c ontrac t does not qualify under se ction 401(a) , 403(a) , 403(b), or

408 of the Interna l Revenue Code of 1986. 11 U.S.C. § 522(d)(10)( E) (e mphasis added) . 10

Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 10 of 23ex em

pt io n s ta tu te do es no t ca rry it s p la inm ean in g. In st ead , hi s p os it io n i s t ha t t o be anex em

pt ib le “ an nu ity ” wit hi n t he m ean in g o f th atst atut e th e so ur ce o f th e fu nd s u se d t o b uy the an nu it y m us t b e em pl oym en t-r el at edin co m e, sa la ry , or wag es , andno t an in he rit an ce. In supp ort o f th atpo si ti on , th e trus te e ci te s t he le gi sl at iv e h is to ry

of 1 1 U.S.C. § 52 2( d) (1 0) (E), whi chis th e an al og ou s fe de ral ex em pt io n, an d p rece de ntfro m th e Uni te d S ta te s Supr em e Co urt an d o th er co urts ap pl y in g t he fed eral ex em pt io n o r so m e o th er s ta te ’s exe m pt io n. Se e H.R. Rep . No. 9 5- 59 5, at36 2 (1 97 7) , rep rin te d i n 1 97 8 U.S.C.C .A.N. 578 7, 6 31 8 (“ Para gr ap h (1 0) ex em

pt s ce rta in be ne fit s tha t ar e ak in to futur e earni ng s o f th e de bt or .”); see als o R ou se y , 54 4 U.S. at33 1– 32 , 12 5 S .Ct. at15 69 ; Inre Eil be rt, 16 2 F .3d52 3, 5 26 –2 7 (8 th Cir . 19 98 ). The t ru st ee al so arg ue s t ha t g en eral pr in ci pl es of s ta tu to ry

in te rp ret at io n i nd ic at e th atwe sh ou ldin te rp retth e wor d

“ an nu it y ” in li gh t o f th e wor d “pe ns io n.” Doi ng so , he a rg ue s, l ead s t o t he co nc lu si on th atth e Geo rg iaex em pt io n re qu ire s t he an nu it y to be , in hi s wo rd s,

“ li ke a true ret ire m en t v eh ic le ” an d fu nd edby w ag es or s om e o th er em pl oym en t-r el at edin co m e—n otfun de d b y anin he rit an ce. See In r e Eil be rt, 1 62 F.3 d a t 5 26 –2 7 (i nt erp ret in g “ an nu it y ” in th e Io wa ex em pt io n s ta tu te ). Bo th th e Geo rg iaan d fe de ral ex em pt io n s ta tu te s re fer t o a“pe ns io n,”

11 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 11 of 23“ an nu it y ,” “ orsi m il ar p lan o r co nt ract .” The Supr em e Co urt h el d i n R ou se y th at 5
anin di vi du al ret ire m en t ac co un t i s a “ si m il ar p lan o r co nt ract ” fo r pu rp os es of t he fed eral st atut e. 54 4 U.S. at33 4– 35 , 12 5 S .Ct. at15 71 . The Co urt re as on edth at , li ke th e p la ns li st edin th e st atut e, IRAs “pr ov id e a s ub st itut e fo r wag es (by wages , fo r pr es en t p ur

po se s, we m ean co m

pe ns at io n e arn edas h ou rly or s al ary in co m e), an d a re n otm ere s av in gs acco un ts .” Id . at 3 29 , 12 5 S .Ct. at15 68 . It s pe ci fic al ly no te d t ha t “ [w]hatall of [ th e li st ed ] pl an s h av e in co m m on is th atth ey

pro vi de in co m e th atsubs ti tu te s fo r wag es ,” id . at 3 31 , 12 5 S .Ct. at15 69 , andth at“ IRA in co m e subs ti tu te s fo r wag es lo stup on ret ire m en t an d d is ti ng ui sh IRAs fro m typic al sav in gs acco un ts ,” id . at 3 32 , 12 5 S .Ct. at15 69 . The tru st ee ar gu es th at th os e st at em en ts m ean th atth e so ur ce o f th e fund s u se d t o p ur ch as e an ex em pt ib le an nu ity m us t b e wag es or o th er em pl oym en t-r el at edin co m e an d n otan in he rit an ce. The tru st ee al so urg es us to fol lo w th e In re Eil be rt d eci si on . The Eig ht h Ci rcu ithe ldinth atcas e th atanan nu it y pu rch as edwit h i nh eri te d fu nd s i s n ota

“pe ns io n, an nu it y , or s im il ar p la n o r co nt ract ” wit hi n t he m ean in g o f Io wa Co de §

The fe dera l statute, unlike the Georg ia statute, also includes in the list with pensions and 5 annuities “stock bonus” and “pr ofitsharing ” plans. 11 U.S.C. § 522 (d)( 10)(E) ; see supra note 4. 12 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 12 of 2362 7.6 (8 )(e) (19 98 ). In re Eil be rt, 1 62 F.3dat 5 27 . In d oi ng so , th e co urt n ot ed 6 th atIowa ’s exe m

pt io n s ta tu te was m od el edon th e fed eral ex em pt io n s ta tu te , 11 U.S.C. § 5 22 (d )(1 0) (E), an d tha t “ Co ng res s d es cri be d t ha t fe de ral ex em pt io n a s ‘exem pt [in g] cert ai n b en efi ts th atare ak in to futur e earni ng s o f th e d eb to r.’” Id. at 52 6 (q uo ti ng H.R. Rep . No. 9 5- 59 5, at36 2 (1 97 7) , rep rin te d i n 1 97 8 U.S.C.C.A.N. 57 87 , 63 18 ). Viewi ng “ an nu it y ” as a “pu rel y ge ne ric term

whi ch refe rs to th e m etho d o f pa y m en t an d n otto th e u nd erl y in g n atur e o f th e as se t,” t he Eig ht h C irc ui t re as on edth atth e te rm sh ou ldbe readinli gh t o f th e o th er p lan t y pe li st edin th e st atut e, whi chwas “ pe ns io n.” Id. at52 6– 27 . Thatis ho w itreac he d th e co nc lu si on th aton ly ann ui ti es th at“pr ov id e b en efi ts in li euof e arn in gs aft er The I owa e x emption stated: 6 A debtor who is a reside nt of this state may hold exempt from ex ecution the followingproper

ty :

. . . 8. The de btor’s rights in:

. . . e. A pa y ment or a por

tion of a pay

ment under a

pension, annuity , or similar plan or contra ct on ac count of illness, disability , death, a g e, or le ng th of servic e, unless the pay ment or a por

tion of the pay

ment results from c ontributions to t he plan or contra ct by

the debtor w ithin one y ear prior to the filingof a ba nkruptcy petition, which contr ibutions are above the normal a nd customary

contributions under the plan or c ontrac t, in which case the portion of the pa y ment attributable to the contributions above the nor mal and customar

y rate is not ex empt. I owa Code § 627.6( 8)(e ) (1998) . 13

Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 13 of 23ret ire m en t,” h owe ve r fu nd ed , canbe ex em pt edun de r Io wa Co de § 6 27 .6(8 )(e) . Id. at52 7. Be cau se th e an nu it y pa ym en ts in th atcas e d idno t “ rep la ce l os t i nc om e” an d b ecau se th e an nu it y

was p ur ch as edwit h asi ng le pa ym en t o f in he rit edfun ds in st eadof “ wit h c on tri bu ti on s o ve r ti m e,” the an nu it y pa ym en ts were n ot“ ak in to fu tu re ea rn in gs .” Id . (qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . In s um , th e trus te e arg ue s t ha t Cas se ll ’s ann ui ty is n otanex em pt ib le “ an nu it y ” b ecau se sh e u se d i nh eri te d fu nd s an d n otwage s o r sa la ry

in co m e to pu rch as e it . Ban krup tc y

co urts ha ve ge ne ral ly agree d tha t n otev ery an nu it y is an

“ an nu it y ” fo r th e p ur

po se s o f th e Geo rg iaex em pt io n s ta tu te . See, e.g ., In re Cas se ll , 44 3 B .R. 20 0, 2 04 (Ban kr . N.D. Ga. 20 10 ); I n re Bram le tt e, 33 3 B .R. 91 1, 92 0– 21 (Ban kr . N.D. Ga. 20 05 ); I n re Mi ch ael , 33 9 B .R. 79 8, 8 02 –0 7 (B an kr . N.D. Ga. 200 5) . See g en eral ly In re Gree n, No . 06 –1 40 84 , 20 07 W L 10 31 67 7 (Ban kr . E.D. Ten n. Ap r. 2, 2 00 7) (un publ is he d) (ap pl y in g t he Geor gi a ex em pt io n) . Cas se ll co nt en ds , th ou gh , th athe r an nu it y is an“ an nu it y ” wit hi n t he m ean in g o f Ga. Co de Ann . § 4 4- 13 -1 00 , arg ui ng th atwe sh ou ldgi ve “ an nu it y ” it s pl ai n a ndord in ary m ean in g a s s etou t i n t he Ro us ey op in io n. See 54 4 U.S. at33 0, 12 5 S .Ct. at15 69 . Her fal lb ackpo si ti on is th atif we d o l oo k b ey on d the pl ai n m ean in g o f “ an nu it y ,” we sh ou ldap pl y th e m ul ti fact ortes t fr om

In r e And ers en , 25 9 B .R. 68 7, 6 91 –9 2 (8 th Cir . BAP 20 01 ). In t ha t ca se , th e Ban kr up tc y 14 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 14 of 23App el la te Pan el of t he Eig ht h C irc ui t l ai d o utsi x fa ct or s t o c on si de r whe n

de ci di ng whet he r a p art ic ul ar an nu it y qu al ifi es as a n “ an nu it y ” u nd er the fed eral ex em pt io n s ta tu te : [(1 )] W ere the pa ym en ts de si gn edor i nt en de d t o b e a wag e subs ti tu te ? [(2 )] W ere the co nt rib ut io ns m ad e o ve r ti m e? The l on ge r th e p eri od of in ve st m en t, t he m or e li ke ly the in ve st m en t fa ll s wi th in th e am bi t o f th e st atut e an d i s t he res ul t o f a l on g s ta nd in g re ti rem en t s tra te gy, not m erel y a rece ntch an ge in th e n atur e o f th e as se t. [(3 )] Do m

ul ti pl e co nt rib ut or s ex is t? Inv es tm en ts pu rch as edin is ol at io n, o ut si de th e co nt ex t o f workp la ce co nt rib ut io ns , m ay be les s li ke ly to qua li fy

as e xe m pt . [(4 )] W ha t i s t he return o n i nv es tm en t? An i nv es tm en t wh ic h re tu rn s on ly the in it ia l co ntrib ut io n wi th earn edin te res t o r in co m e is m or e li ke ly to b e a n on ex em

ptin ve st m en t. In co nt ras t, i nv es tm en ts whi ch co m pu te pa ym en ts ba se d upo n t he parti ci pa nt ’s est im at edli fe s pa n, bu t wh ic h t erm in at e upo n t he pa rti ci pa nt ’s dea th or t he actua l l ife sp an , are ak in to a ret ire m en t i nv es tm en t p lan. Th atis , wil l t he de bt or en joy a win df al l i f sh e o ut li ve s h er l ife expe ct an cy ? Is s he pe na li zed if s he di es pre m atur el y ? [(5 )] W ha t co nt ro l m ay

th e d eb to r ex erci se ov er the ass et ? If th e de bt or ha s d is cret io n t o wi th dr aw fro m th e co rp us , th enth e co nt ract m os t cl os el y

res em bl es a no ne xe m

ptin ve st m en t. [(6 )] W as th e in ve st m en t a p reb an krup tc y pl an ni ng m eas ur e? In t hi s reg ard , th e co urt m ay

ex am in e th e ti m in g o f th e p ur ch as e o f th e co nt ractin rel at io n t o t he fil in g o f th e b an krup tc y cas e. Inre An de rs en , 25 9 B .R. at 6 91 –9 2.

15

Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 15 of 23The tru st ee ar gu es th atth e And ers entes t co nf li ct s wi th th e an al y si s u se d i n Ro us ey an d In re Eil be rt. The tes t d oe s, h owe ve r, in cl ud e fac to rs th atth os e two de ci si on s an d o th ers ha ve co ns id eredwhen de ci di ng whethe r a p art ic ul ar an nu it y is anex em

pt ib le “ an nu it y ” u nd er v ari ou s s ta tu te s. See , e.g., Ro us ey , 54 4 U.S. at 32 9– 33 2, 1 25 S.Ct . at 1 56 8– 15 70 (co ns id eri ng whet he r IRAs pro vi de a subs ti tu te fo r wag es , th e fi rs t In re An de rs enfact or ); I n re Eil be rt, 1 62 F.3dat 5 27 (co ns id eri ng th e fi rs t, s eco nd , th ird , andsi xt h In re An de rs enfact or s) ; In re Hue bn er, 9 86 F.2d12 22 , 12 24 (8t h C ir. 1 99 3) (co ns id eri ng th e d eb to r’s co nt ro l ov er the co rp us , th e fi fth In r e And ers enfact or ); I n re Bram le tt e, 33 3 B .R. at 9 21 (co ns id eri ng all of t he In r e And ers enfact or s) ; In re Mi ch ael , 33 9 B .R. at 8 04 (co ns id eri ng th e fi rs t In re An de rs enfact or ). Ro us ey wou lddi ct at e th atwe gi ve “ an nu ity ” it s p la in m ean in g i f we were ap pl y in g t he fed eral ex em pt io n s ta tu te , bu t we ar e n ot . W e are ap pl y in g t he Geo rg iaex em

pt io n s ta tu te . Whe n t he Geor gi a le gi sl atur e o pt edou t o f th e fed eral st atut ory li stof b an krup tc y

ex em pt io ns an d e na ct edit s o wn, i t i nt en de d t ha t Geo rg iade bt or s b e tr eat eddi ffer en tl y fro m fed eral de bt or s i n a t l eas t s om e ci rcu m st an ces . Thatcau ti on s ag ai ns t as su m in g t ha t an in te rp ret at io n o f th e fed eral st atut e sh ou ldbe fol lo wedin a Geo rg iacas e, al th ou gh th e cau ti on is les se ne d i n si tu at io ns li ke th is on e whe re the rel ev an t s ta tu to ry lan gu ag e is m at eri al ly 16 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 16 of 23id en ti cal . W e are un su re wh ethe r th e Geo rg iaSupr em e Co urt wo ul d b e p ers ua de d

by the Ro us ey

reas on in g, b y

th e Eig ht h C irc ui t’s In re Eil be rt r eas on in g, b y th e Eig ht h C irc ui t Ba nkrupt cy App el la te Pan el ’s In re And ers enreas on in g, o r by so m e ot he r rea so ni ng . B. Inad di ti on to di sa gr eei ng ab ou t t he m ean in g o f “ an nu ity ,” th e p art ie s al so di sa gr ee ab ou t wh ethe r Cas se ll ’s ann ui ty giv es he r a ri gh t t o re cei ve pay m en ts th at are “ onacco un t o f . . . age,” wh ic h i s an ot he r requi rem en t fo r th is ex em pt io n. Ga. Co de Ann . § 4 4- 13 -1 00 (a)( 2) (E). Neit he r pa rty po in ts to an y Geor gi a d eci si on s th atwou ldhe lp us res ol ve th e d is ag reem en t, n orha ve we fo un d a ny. The ba nkrupt cy

co urt an d t he di st ric t co urt co nc lu de d t ha t t he pa ym en ts are o n a cco un t of ag e b as edin pa rt o n C as se ll ’s tes ti m on y th atsh e p ur ch as edth is an nu it y be cau se sh e was 65 . Bot h c ou rts als o re li edon a fed eral earl y -wit hd rawal tax pe na lt y for an nu it ie s t ha t i s s im il ar t o t he on e fo r IRAs th atth e Supr em e Co urt fo un d si gn ifi can t i n R ou se y . The Supr em e Co urt h el d i n R ou se y th atIRAs do “pr ov id e a ri gh t t o pa ym en t o n a cco un t o f ag e.” 5 44 U.S. at 3 28 –2 9, 1 25 S.Ct . at 1 56 7– 68 . It reas on edth at“ on acco un t o f” m ean s “ be cau se of,” whi ch “ requi re[s ] a cau sa l co nn ect io n b etweenth e te rm th atth e p hr as e ‘onacco un t o f’ m od ifi es an d the

17 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 17 of 23fact or

sp eci fie d i n the st atut e atis su e.” Id. at32 6, 1 25 S.Ct . at 1 56 6. Th e Co urt 7
co nc lu de d t ha t the de bt or ’s rig ht s t o t he IRA p aym en ts were caus al ly con ne ct edto th e d eb to r’s ag e b ecau se of a10 % tax pe na lty forwit hd rawi ng fun ds fro m anIRA be fo re the ag e o f 59 y ears an d 6 m on th s. Id . at 3 27 –2 9, 1 25 S.Ct . at 1 56 6– 68 ; s ee al so 26 U.S.C. §§ 72 (t) , 40 8( a). The earl y wit hd rawal pe na lt y

“ su gg es ts th at Co ng res s d es ig ne d i t t o p recl ud e ear ly acces s t o IRAs,” R ou se y , 54 4 U.S. at32 7, 12 5 S .Ct. at15 67 , andbe cau se th e p en al ty “ is rem ov edwhen th e acc ou ntho ld er tu rn s ag e 5 9 1 /2 , th e [d eb to rs ’] rig htto th e b al an ce o f th ei r IRAs is a ri gh t t o pa ym en t ‘on acco un t o f’ age,” i d. at32 8, 1 25 S.Ct . at 1 56 7. Cas se ll arg ue s t ha t fo r th e sa m e rea so n t he Supr em e Co urt fo un d IRA pa ym en ts to be on acco un t o f ag e, he r an nu it y pa ym en ts are as well —b ot h t y pe s o f pa ym en ts are t ax adva nt ag ed . An an nu it an t i s p erm it te d t o e xc lu de a po rti on of th e p aym en ts fro m

he r gr os s i nc om e eac h year un ti l s he ha s re co ve redall of h er in ve st m en t i n the an nu it y co nt ract . See g en eral ly T reas . Reg . §§ 1.7 2- 1 t o -1 1. At l eas t s om e an nu it ie s ar e subjec t t o t he same early with dr awal pe na lt ie s as IRAs . See 2 6 U.S.C. § 72 (q ). Whe n s he pu rch as edhe r an nu it y Cas se ll ha d a lre ady pa ss edth e ag e atwhi ch th e ear ly-with dr awal pe na lt y wou ldha ve ap pl ie d, b utsh e
Geor g ia ca se law a lso sugg ests that “on ac count of” and “be cause of” a re sy nony mous. 7 See L uncef ord v. Peac htree Cas. Ins. Co., 495 S.E.2d 88, 90–91 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997) (“ [A] nother construction could be that the phra se [‘beca use of’ ] m eans ‘ by

rea son of’ or ‘ on acc ount of.’”) . 18 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 18 of 23arg ue s t ha t i s i rrel ev an t.

The tru st ee co un te rs th atCas se ll ’s ann ui ty doe s n otqu al ify for fa vo rab le tax tre at m en t an d i ns is ts th atth e an nu it y co nt ractit se lf s ta te s t ha t i t d oe s n ot . He arg ue s t ha t t he an nu it y

pa ym en ts do no t qua li fy

forfav or ab le tax tre at m en t u nd er th e In te rn al Rev en ue Co de be cau se , he b el ie ve s, s ect io ns 40 1( a), 4 03 (a), 4 03 (b ), an d 4 08 of t he Co de li m itqu al ifyin g a ss et s t o t ho se pu rch as edwit h o ne ’s own earn in gs . Cas se ll pu rch as edhe r an nu it y wit h i nh eri te d fu nd s i ns te adof e arn in gs . Bec au se of t ha t d iff

eren ce, h er an nu it y

pa ym en ts are d iff

eren t fr om

th e IRA pa ym en ts co ns id eredin Ro us ey . 8 Cas se ll arg ue s, as th e b an krup tc y co urt an d t he di st ric t co urt co nc lu de d, t ha t th e an nu it y

pa ym en ts m eetth e “ on acco un t o f ag e” re qu ire m en t fo r ex em pt io n i n an ot he r way : Ca ss el l p ur ch as edth e an nu it y be cau se of h er ad vanc in g a ge . The ba nkrupt cy

co urt d rew a d is ti nc ti on be twee n am an da to ry an d ape rm is si bl e in fere nc e. It re as on edth atCas se ll ’s age when sh e p ur ch as edth e an nu it y di d n ot co m pe l a f in di ng th atth e p aym en ts are o n a cco un t o f ag e, cf. Inre Eil be rt, 1 62 Although w e have set out the parties’ positions about whether the a nnuity pay ments are 8 elig ible for f

avora ble fe dera l tax trea

tment based on Cassell’s a g e, we need not de cide that issue, at least not now. Whether w e will ever have to de cide it will depend on the a nswer to our cer tified questions. I f the Ge org ia Supreme Court de cides that the state exemption i ssue turns on the fe dera l tax law issue, wecan the n decide that fede ral issue. On the other ha nd, if the Ge org ia Supreme Court dec ides that the state e x emption issue does not turn on the fe dera l tax issue, there (merc ifully) will be no nee d to decide it. 19

Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 19 of 23F.3 d a t 5 28 , bu t t ha t fa ctdi d p erm itth e co urt t o m ak e th atfin di ng . Andth e co urt

m ad e it . It m ay be th atpa ym en ts fro m

all fix edli fe an nu it ie s, s uc h a s t he on e inth is cas e, sh ou ldbe co ns id eredto be m ad e o n a cco un t o f ag e u nd er the Geor gi a st atut e. Fi xe d l ife an nu it ie s u se th e an nu it an t’s ag e atth e ti m e th e an nu it y pa ym en ts be gi n to cal cu la te th e si ze o f th e p aym en ts , an d i n t ha t way the pa ym en ts wil l al way s b e 9 ti edto th e an nu it an t’s ag e. Howev er, n ei th er the parti es no r we h av e b een ab le to fin d a ny deci si on s o f th e Geo rg iaco urts ad dr es si ng whet he r Cas se ll ’s ann ui ty pa ym en ts are o n a cco un t o f ag e as requi redby G a. Co de Ann . § 44 -1 3- 10 0( a)(2 )(E). Anditis un cl ear t o wh atex te nt , if an y , fed eral tax tre at m en t of an nu it ie s i s re le va ntto th e Geo rg iaex em pt io n s ta tu te ’s tre at m en t o f th em . The in te ntof C on gr es s i s n otne ces sa ril y th e in te ntof t he Geor gi a le gi sl atur e. Als o un cl ear i s wh ethe r Cas se ll ’s in te ntin bu y in g t he an nu it y or t he m an ne r in whi ch th e p aym en ts are ca lc ul at edres ul ts in th em be in g o n a cco un t o f ag e. Lack in g a ny

L ife a nnuity pay ments are based on, a

mong othe r thing s, the life expectanc y of the 9 annuitant at the time the pa y ments beg in. See Expl ainingTy pes Of F ix ed Annuities, Investopedia ( Fe b. 23, 2011), http:// www.investope dia.com/ar ticles/retire ment/05/071205.asp#axz z215P RPKps. An annuitant’s life e x pecta

ncy depends in no small par

t on her a g e. See U .S. Soc. Sec. Admin., Period L ife Ta

ble, 2007, http://www.ssa.g ov/STATS/t able4c 6.html. Bec ause a n older pe rson has a shorter life expectanc y , an annuitant who is older when the a

nnuity pay ments beg in will rece ive larg er a nnuity pay ments. See, e.g ., AARP L ifetime Income Plan With 20 Year Guara ntee, AARP, http: //www.nylaar p.com/Annuities/20-Yea

r-Gua rante e (la st visit ed Jul y

23, 2012). 20 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 20 of 23gu id an ce fr om th e Geo rg iaco urts on th es e que st io ns , we are re lu ct an t t o h azar d a gu es s. III. Fo rtu na te ly, gu es si ng is no t o uron ly opt io n. When th ere i s s ub st an ti al do ub t ab ou t t he co rrec t an swe r to a di sp os it iv e que st io n o f st at e law, a bet te r op ti on is to cert ify the qu es ti on to th e st at e supr em e co urt. See W or ldHarv es t Ch ur ch , Inc . v. Gu id eo ne Mu t. In s. Co ., 58 6 F .3d95 0, 9 60 –6 1 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 9) (“ [T]he certi fic at io n p ro cedur e [i s] a va lu ab le to ol forpro m ot in g t he in te res ts of co op erat iv e fed eral is m

. . . . [th at ] he lp s s av e ti m e, en erg y , andres ou rces an d pr oduc es au th or it at iv e an swe rs to no ve l o r un se tt le d que st io ns of s ta te law.” (ci ta ti on an d quo ta ti on m ark s o m it te d) ). Thi s ca se pre se nt s a s ig ni fic an t s ta te law i ss ue th atis li ke ly to ar is e ag ai n. At o ral arg um en t, co un se l fo r th e trus te e st at edth ata si gn ifi can t n um be r of ba nkrupt cy

de bt or s ar e se ek in g t o e xe m ptth es e types of a nn ui ty paym en ts . W ith th e g raying of t he po pu la ti on an d m or e Am eri can s s hu ffl in g t owa rdret ire m en t, th atnu m be r wil l o nl y

in crea se . A fin al res ol ut io n o f ho w to ap pl y th is Geor gi a ex em pt io n i s n eed ed , andon ly the Geor gi a Supr em e Co urt ca n p ro vi de on e. See LaFrer e v . Quez ad a, 58 2 F .3d12 60 , 12 62 (11 th Cir . 20 09 ) (“ Bec au se st at e supr em e co urts are t he fin al arb it ers of s ta te law, wh enwe writ e to a st at e la w 21 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 21 of 23is su e, we writ e in fai ntan d d is ap pe ari ng in k, an d o nc e th e st at e supr em e co urt

sp eak s t he effe ctof a nyth in g we h av e wri tt enva ni sh es . . . .” (quo ta ti on m ark s om it te d) ). Abs en t ce rti fic at io n, t he qu es ti on see m s u nl ik el y to reac h t ha t co urt. So we refra in fro m

writ in g t o t hi s s ta te law i ss ue in ou r ownfai ntin k a ndaskfor th e h el p o f th e o ne co urt t ha t ca n wri te th e an swe r in bo ld , bl acklet te rs . W e certi fy

th e fo ll owi ng qu es ti on s t o t he Geor gi a Supr em e Co urt: (1 ) Is a si ng le -p rem iu m

fix edan nu it y

pu rch as edwith i nh eri te d fu nd s an“ an nu it y ” fo r th e p ur

po se s o f Ga. Co de Ann . § 44 -1 3- 10 0( a)(2 )(E)? (2 ) Is a de bt or ’s rig htto rece iv e a p aym en t fr om anan nu it y

“ on acco un t o f . . . age” forth e p ur po se s o f Ga. Co de Ann . § 44 -1 3- 10 0( a)(2 )(E) i f th e an nu it y pa ym en ts are s ub

ject t o a ge -b as ed fed eral tax tre atm en t, i f th e an nu it an t p ur ch as edth e an nu ity be cau se of he r ag e, orif t he an nu it y paym en ts are ca lc ul at edba se d o n t he ag e of th e an nu it an t atth e ti m e th e an nu ity was p ur ch as ed ? Of co ur se , “ [o ]ur st at em en t o f th e que st io ns is no t d es ig ne d t o l im itth e in qu iry of the ” Geo rg iaSupr em e Co urt. Mo sh er v . Spe ed st ar Di v. o f AMCA In t’l, In c., 52 F.3d91 3, 9 17 (11 th Cir . 19 95 ). Ins te ad , as we h av e st at edbe fo re: [T]he p art ic ul ar p hr as in g u se d i n t he cert ifi edqu es ti on is no t t o res tri ctth e [Geo rg ia ] Supr em e Co urt’s co ns id erat io n o f th e p ro bl em s in vo lv edan d t he is su es as t he Supr em e Co urt p erce iv es th em to be in it s an al y si s o f th e rec or d c ert ifi edin th is cas e. Thi s l at itud e ex te nd s to th e [Geo rg ia ] Supr em e Co urt’s re st at em en t o f th e is su e o r is su es an d t he m an ne r inwhi ch th e an swe rs are t o b e g iv en , whethe r as a co m pr eh en si ve who le or i n s ub or di na te or e ve n c on ti ng en t p art s.

22 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 22 of 23Marti ne z v . Rod rig ue z, 39 4 F .2d15 6, 1 59 n.6 (5th C ir. 1 96 8) . The en ti re re co rd 1 0
on ap pe al in th is cas e, in cl ud in g c op ie s o f th e p art ie s’ bri efs , is trans m it te d a lo ng wit h t hi s ce rti fic at io n. QUEST IO NS CERTI FIED .

In Bonne r v. Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1207 ( 11th Cir. 1981) (en ba nc), w e adopte d as 1 0 binding pr ece dent all Fif

th Circuit decisions handed down be fore October 1, 1981. 23 Case: 11-13115 Date Filed: 08/03/2012 Page: 23 of 23