11 U.S.C. § 522

Section 522 permits debtors to exempt value in property, rather than the specific property, so a limited-value exemption does not remove the underlying property from the bankruptcy estate.

Miller v. Young (In re Young) · filed 2017-11-28

This section permits debtors to exempt value in property, rather than the specific property.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) uses domicile to determine applicable state exemption law; lawful indefinite residence with intent to stay can establish domicile without a green card.

In re Mendoza · filed 2019-03-04(b)(3)(A)

On the Petition Date, the Debtors lawfully were living in Florida indefinitely and actually intended to establish a permanent Florida residence. Therefore, on the Petition Date, the Debtors were domiciled in Florida within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 522(b) and cannot claim the Federal Exemptions.

Section 522(d)(5) allows a Chapter 13 debtor to apply the wildcard exemption to eligible property acquired post-petition that becomes part of the bankruptcy estate.

In re Cruz · filed 2018-05-18(d)(5)

Furthermore, § 522, being a section of general applicability, applies to all property of the estate, including property acquired post-petition.

Postpetition transformation of exempt property into nonexempt-form property does not return it to the bankruptcy estate.

Lowe v. Yochem (In Re Reed) · filed 1995-07-13(c)

We join the majority of courts that have ruled on this issue, concluding that a postpetition transformation of exempt property into a form of property which would not be exempt under state law does not return the property to the estate.

Section 522(g) bars a debtor from claiming an exemption when the trustee's objection threatening avoidance powers causes the property to be reconveyed; a formal avoidance action or final judgment is unnecessary.

In Re John L. Glass, Debtor. John L. Glass v. Michael Hitt, Chapter 7 Trustee · filed 1995-07-13(g)

The filing of the objection containing the threat to use avoidance powers which resulted in the reconveyance of the property to the estate was “some action.”

Section 522(g) bars a debtor from claiming an exemption in property that the trustee recovers for the estate after the debtor voluntarily transferred it.

In Re Downs · filed 1996-12-04§ 522(g)

The Court further finds that the Trustee has “recovered” the Home for the benefit of the estate within the meaning of §. 522(g) as a result of his filing of an adversary proceeding against David and LLD which resulted in a default judgment against LLD and a stipulated judgment against David.

Section 522(g) permits a debtor to claim an exemption in property recovered by the trustee when the debtor could have exempted it had it not been transferred.

Tavenner v. Smoot (In Re Smoot) · filed 1999-09-30§ 522(g)

Moreover, the plain language of § 522(g) appears to expressly contemplate this result by enabling debtor to claim an exemption on property recovered by the trustee if debtor could have exempted the property had it not been transferred.

Section 522(g) bars the debtor from exempting property recovered by the trustee when the debtor voluntarily transferred it.

Geddes v. Mayhall Enterprises, LLC (In Re Jones) · filed 2003-12-15(g)

Thus, the debtor cannot claim an exemption under 11 U.S.C. § 522(g) in the funds recovered by the trustee.

Section 522(g) permits a debtor to exempt recovered property only when the transfer was beyond the debtor’s personal control and was not concealed; a knowingly signed, revocable wage assignment is voluntary.

Huebner v. Trapp (In Re Huebner) · filed 1982-03-04(g)

The one example given in the legislative history of 11 U.S.C. § 522(g) of an involuntary transfer (the fixing of a statutory lien) indicates that Congress intended to allow recovery of only those transfers beyond debtor’s personal control. Huebner, however, had significant control of whether the transfers would take place, both at the time of the agreement and when the assignment became effective.

Section 522(g) bars a debtor from exempting property recovered by the trustee when the debtor voluntarily transferred that property before bankruptcy.

Reigle v. Leinheiser (In Re Leinheiser) · filed 1985-07-19(g)

In this regard, we find that, because the subject transfer was a voluntary transfer, the debtors cannot exempt any property that the trustee recovers under 11 U.S.C. § 550.

Section 522(g) permits a debtor to exempt trustee-recovered property only when the statutory conditions are satisfied, including that the debtor did not voluntarily transfer it.

In Re Rutland · filed 2004-12-09(g)

Under 11 U.S.C. § 522(g), a debtor may not claim as exempt property recovered by the trustee under § 550 (which incorporates transfer avoidance actions brought under §§ 544, 545, 547, 548, 549, 553(b), or 724(a)) if the debtor made the transfer voluntarily. ... In the present case it is clear that Rut-land made a volitional transfer to her landlord prepaying her apartment rent. If the trustee is able to avoid that transfer under one of the avoidance powers sections enumerated in § 550, then § 522(g) precludes the debtor from claiming the recovered funds as exempt.

Section 522(g)(1)(A) bars a debtor from claiming an exemption in property voluntarily transferred by the debtor and recovered by the trustee.

Horwitz v. Rote (In re Moorhouse) · filed 2013-02-28(g)(1)(A)

the debtor may not claim an exemption in the property interest that the Trustee has recovered.

Section 522(g)(1) permits a debtor to exempt property recovered by a trustee only if the debtor did not voluntarily transfer the property.

Greenwood v. Clark · filed 2015-02-13(g)(1)

In order to show that their homestead exemption might be preserved under § 522(g)(1) as against the lienholder, the Greenwoods were required to demonstrate that their grant of a security interest in excess of the property’s value was not voluntary. 11 U.S.C. § 522(g)(1); see also Rodriguez v. Dorine’s Bail Bonds, Inc. (In re Rodriguez), 361 B.R. 887, 892 (Bankr. D. Ariz. 2007). There is no evidence in the record indicating that the transfer of the deed of trust encumbering the home was involuntary, and the Greenwoods offer none. As a result, the transfer is ineligible for exemption under § 522(g)(1), and the Greenwoods lack a personal stake in the challenged settlement order and related orders sufficient to establish standing.

Section 522(g)(1) does not bar a debtor from claiming an exemption when the trustee has not recovered property in a manner covered by the statute; avoiding only the entireties form of property, while restoring its economic value to the estate, was not a statutory recovery.

Hagan v. Mickens · filed 2018-08-14(g)(1)

The Court agrees with the Bankruptcy Court that under the facts of this case, there was no recovery under Section 522(g), and thus the amended exemption was not precluded by Section 522(g) and was properly allowed under Rule 1009(a).

Section 522(g)(1)(A) permits a debtor to exempt recovered property only when the transfer was not voluntary, subject to the statute’s other conditions.

John Herman Lemanski, Jr. · filed 2022-05-20(g)(1)(A)

The Debtor’s transfer via the First Amendment clearly was a “voluntary transfer” by the Debtor of his property, within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 522(g)(1)(A), because the Debtor voluntarily entered into the First Amendment with his spouse.

Section 522(g)(1)(A) bars a debtor from exempting property recovered by a trustee if the debtor voluntarily transferred it.

Silagy v. Bank One, Akron, N.A. (In Re Collin) · filed 1995-05-08(g)(1)(A)

As the section indicates, the ability of a debtor to claim an exemption in funds recovered by the Trustee is only available if the transfer was involuntary.

Section 522(g) bars a debtor from exempting voluntarily transferred property when the trustee’s objection and stated intent to avoid the transfer cause the transferee to release its lien.

In Re Ringham · filed 2003-06-12(g)

Thus, under the tests articulated by the courts in Glass and Snyder, the Trustee in this case took action sufficient to constitute a “recovery” for purposes of § 522(g).

Section 522(g) bars a debtor from exempting property recovered by the trustee when the debtor voluntarily transferred it.

Iannacone v. Household Industrial Finance Co. (In Re Stepka) · filed 2010-03-15(g)

Accordingly, the transfer having been voluntary, there is no basis for the Stepkas to claim a homestead exemption in the property pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(g).

Section 522(i)(2) lets a debtor preserve an avoided judgment lien's priority and attributes against junior lienors, but not against the trustee beyond the homestead-exemption limit.

In re Wilkinson · filed 1995-07-18(i)(2)

In essence, when a debtor seeks to assert the rights he or she acquired under § 522(i)(2) against the trustee in a § 554(a) abandonment action, the debtor may be said to have succeeded to the priority status and the attributes of the avoided judgment lien, and may do so in an amount not to exceed the dollar amount of the judgment lien or the aggregate amount of the homestead exemption (here $20,000), whichever is less.

Section 522(e) makes an exemption waiver unenforceable against a judicial lienholder, and § 522(f)(1) permits lien avoidance notwithstanding any waiver of exemptions.

In re D'Italia · filed 2014-03-18(e), (f)(1)

Reading 11 U.S.C. §§ 522(e) and (f)(1) together, I conclude that a judicial lien-holder should be viewed as a creditor that holds an unsecured claim for purposes of 11 U.S.C. § 522(e).

Properly filed tax liens remain enforceable against exempt property in full, including amounts securing noncompensatory tax penalties; § 522(c)(2)(B) limits the debtor's avoidance powers under § 522(h).

In Re Douglas P. Demarah, Debtor. Douglas P. Demarah, Debtor-Appellant v. United States · filed 1995-08-17(c)(2)(B), (h), (g), and (e)(2)(A)

Nothing in § 522(c)(2)(B) divides a tax lien into separate components. The whole amount owed is covered by the lien.

The court applied § 522(c)(2) to conclude that exempt property remains liable during the bankruptcy case for a valid tax lien, supporting inclusion of that property’s value when calculating the IRS’s secured claim for plan treatment.

In Re May · filed 1996-03-22(c)(2)

Finally, the conclusion (that the estate has an interest in property that can be valued under § 506(2) if the property was part of the estate on the petition date) also is in line with § 522(c)(2), which states exempt property is still hable for a vahd tax hen “during” the case.

Section 522(c)(2) makes property exempted from the bankruptcy estate subject to a properly filed federal tax lien.

Tourville v. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Tourville) · filed 1997-11-19§ 522(c)(2)

Exempt property is subject to a tax lien, notice of which is properly filed. 11 U.S.C. § 522(c)(2) (1994).

Property exempted under § 522 remains liable for a debt secured by a properly filed tax lien, including a federal tax lien on a homestead.

In Re McFadyen · filed 1998-01-20(c)(2)(B)

However, Section 522(c)(2)(B) provides that property exempted under this section remains liable for any debt if it is “a debt secured by a lien that is — ... a tax lien, notice of which is properly filed.” 11 U.S.C. § 522(c)(2)(B) (1997).

This court held that exempt IRA property remains subject to a valid prepetition federal tax lien through bankruptcy.

Deppisch v. United States Internal Revenue Service (In Re Deppisch) · filed 1998-12-11(c)(2)(B)

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(c)(2)(B), the pre-petition tax hen, filed in Frankhn County survived the bankruptcy proceedings.

Under § 522(c)(2)(B), exempt property remains liable during or after bankruptcy for a debt secured by a properly filed tax lien.

Buesing v. United States · filed 1999-01-13(c)(2)(B)

However, the debtor’s property, including the plaintiff’s exempt property such as the Clubhouse Drive residence in the instant action, remains liable for a debt secured by a tax lien of the IRS pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(c)(2)(B) (1994) which addresses "Exemptions:”

Property exempted under § 522 remains subject to a properly filed tax lien.

Mulligan v. United States (In Re Mulligan) · filed 1999-05-14§ 522(c)(2)(B)

Section 522(c)(2)(B) is clear. The Plaintiffs property, even that claimed as exempt under Schedule C, continues to secure the Defendant’s lien.

A federal tax lien remains attached to exempt property during and after bankruptcy.

Wood v. United States (In Re Wood) · filed 1999-09-09§ 522(c)(2)(B)

This lien remained upon all exempt property during and after the case. 11 U.S.C. § 522(c)(2)(B).

Section 522(c) generally leaves exempt property liable for valid liens despite the debtor’s bankruptcy discharge.

Lowther v. Lowther · filed 2002-12-09(c)

Although the discharge order may have extinguished Debtor’s personal liability for that debt, the lien itself passed through the bankruptcy proceeding unaffected. ... This is so even though it encumbered property that Debtor claimed as exempt. See Owen v. Owen , 500 U.S. 305, 308-09 (1991); Farrey v. Sanderfoot , 500 U.S. 291, 297 (1991); 11 U.S.C. § 522(c).

Section 522(c) provides that exempt property remains liable for a debt secured by a lien unless the lien is void or avoided under the Bankruptcy Code.

Davila v. Luna Residential II, LLC · filed 2025-08-19(c)

The debtor’s exempt property remains liable for a debt secured by a lien that is not void under § 506(d) and not avoided under certain other Code provisions. 11 U.S.C. § 522(c).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits the debtor to claim a homestead as exempt by incorporating the applicable Arkansas constitutional homestead exemption, and the court applied that provision to allow the Meadowlake property exemption.

In Re Jones · filed 1995-08-18(b)(2)(A)

The debtor may claim his homestead as exempt property pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A) (1988). Section 522(b)(2)(A) makes applicable the homestead exemptions found in article 9, section 3, of the Arkansas Constitution.

Section 522(b)(2)(B) permits an individual debtor to exempt entireties property only to the extent the interest is exempt from process under applicable law; because the altered deed did not create a tenancy by the entirety under Virginia law, the exemption was disallowed.

In re Scialdone · filed 1995-09-22(b)(2)(B)

An individual debtor may exempt an interest in property held by debtor as a tenant by the entirety to the extent that the interest is exempt from process under applicable law. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(B).

When a tenancy by the entirety is severed by divorce and becomes a tenancy in common, § 522(b)(2)(B)'s protections for the property are extinguished while the debtor's interest remains in the bankruptcy estate.

In re Lowery · filed 1996-12-20§ 522(b)(2)(B)

The effect of the change of the property’s character to a tenancy in common merely extinguishes the protections offered by § 522(b)(2)(B).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) defines the types of property that may be exempted from the bankruptcy estate and does not require the debtor to be independently entitled to the particular exemption under state law.

In Re Skjetne · filed 1997-07-25(b)(2)(A)

We believe that § 522(b)(2)(A) does not require that a debtor actually be entitled to a particular exemption. Rather, the section merely defines what types of property can be exempted from property of the estate.

Section 522(b)(2)(B) permits an individual debtor to exempt an interest held as a tenant by the entirety or joint tenant immediately before the case began, to the extent applicable nonbankruptcy law exempts that interest from process.

Phillips v. McCullen (In Re McCullen) · filed 1999-09-28(b)(2)(B)

Code § 522(b)(2)(B) provides that an individual debtor may exempt “any interest in property in which the debtor had, immediately before the commencement of the case, an interest as a tenant by the entirety or joint tenant to the extent that such interest as a tenant by the entirety or joint tenant is exempt from process under applicable nonbankruptcy law.”

Section 522(b)(2)(B) exempts a debtor’s tenancy-by-the-entireties interest only to the extent applicable nonbankruptcy law exempts it from process; in a joint case, the exemption does not protect the property from the trustee.

In Re Thomas · filed 2001-03-29(b)(2)(B)

The exemption permitted by 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(B) is limited. Just as it is not effective against joint creditors in an individual case, it is not effective against the trustee in a joint case. The trustee stands in their shoes. The trustee has all the rights that the debtors had pre-petition, including the right to jointly transfer the property or sever the estate. The entireties property is not exempt and the trustee may administer it.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) allows an individual debtor to exempt property exempt under applicable federal or state or local law as of the petition date.

In Re Dawson · filed 2001-08-20(b)(2)(A)

Section 522(b)(2)(A) provides that an individual debtor may exempt any property “that is exempt under Federal law, other than subsection (d) of this section, or State or local law that is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition ....” 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A). Accordingly, an individual debtor’s claimed homestead exemption is determined by the facts and circumstances that exist at the time of the filing of the bankruptcy petition.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) fixes a debtor’s entitlement to exemptions as of the commencement of the bankruptcy case.

In Re Ellis · filed 2002-03-04(b)(2)(A)

While a different result might obtain if the debtor had filed her bankruptcy case after the policy had matured with the annuity settlement selected by her, a debtor’s entitlement to exemptions in a bankruptcy case is determined as of the commencement of the case.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) fixes a debtor’s eligibility for a state-law exemption as of the bankruptcy petition date.

In Re Webber · filed 2002-05-20(b)(2)(A)

The Debtor’s right to or eligibility for a particular exemption is fixed and determined as of the date of his bankruptcy petition. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A) (debtor electing non-Code exemptions may exempt any property that is exempt under state law “that is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition”).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) requires the applicable exemption law and the extent of the claimed exemption to be determined as of the bankruptcy petition date.

In Re Govoni · filed 2002-12-19(b)(2)(A)

A debtor may exempt property from the estate under “the State or local law that is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition ...” 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A). Accordingly, the facts and law as they exist on the petition date determine the extent of a claimed exemption.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) treats as exempt only property covered by an applicable exemption law, not merely property that state law makes unavailable to attachment.

Benn v. Cole (In Re Benn) · filed 2006-04-06(b)(2)(A)

Had Congress wanted to insert the phrase "exempt from attachment and execution” (or “not subject to attachment”) in place of the word "exempt” in § 522(b)(2)(A), it could have easily done so (and changed the Act concept of "exempt”). However, it did not do so.

Section 522(b)(2) permits states to opt out of the federal exemption scheme, leaving their debtors limited to state-law exemptions.

Paul v. Allred (In re NMI Paul) · filed 2013-02-28(b)(2)

South Dakota has opted out, and so debtors in South Dakota are limited to the exemptions allowed under South Dakota law.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) fixes the applicable exemption law as of the bankruptcy petition date, including when the case is later converted from Chapter 13 to Chapter 7.

Rodriguez v. Mukamal · filed 2020-09-30(b)(2)(A)

This is because the availability of exemptions is determined as of the commencement of a case. See Carpenter v. Brown, 13-CV-61183, 2013 WL 4047017, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 9, 2013) (Moore, J.) (“Exemptions are determined as of the date of the filing of the petition in bankruptcy court.”) (citing 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A) which provides that an individual debtor may exempt from his bankruptcy estate “any property that is exempt under Federal law . . . or State or local law that is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition.”). This also applies in converted cases.

Section 522(b)(2) allows a state to require its debtors to use state exemptions and to define their limits.

In Re Bordelon · filed 2011-01-31(b)(2)

Thus, the Bankruptcy Code does not preempt the Louisiana Legislature’s enactment of La. R.S. 22:912.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) fixes bankruptcy exemption rights as of the time the petition is filed.

Matter of Hahn · filed 1980-07-15(b)(2)(A)

Exemption rights in bankruptcy are determined as of the time of the bankruptcy filing. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) directs courts in opt-out states to apply the state or local exemption law applicable on the petition filing date.

In Re Kolsch · filed 1986-02-18(b)(2)(A)

Where a state has “opted out”, § 522(b)(2)(A) refers to the state or local law that is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition.

Section 522(b) governs a debtor’s election between federal and applicable state law exemptions.

Grzesnikowski v. Shaffer (In Re Shaffer) · filed 1988-12-06(b)(1), (b)(2)

Therefore, it appears that unfair prejudice to EG resulted as a result of the Debtors’ attempt to change their election of exemptions after the sale of the Home and partial distribution of the proceeds to the Debtors had already taken place. ... 1. The Objection is SUSTAINED. The Debtors shall not be allowed to effect the change of their exemptions as contemplated in their Plan.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits exemptions only under law applicable on the petition date.

In Re Harris · filed 1989-09-26(b)(2)(A)

Under Sec. 522(b)(2)(A), a debtor may exempt from property of the estate any property that is exempt under nonbankruptcy federal law, or state or local law "that is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition." ... The language of these sections indicates that the date of petition controls exemption eligibility.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) fixes exemption rights based on the facts and law at filing, so a debtor’s later death does not defeat an already vested homestead exemption.

In Re Combs · filed 1994-04-18(b)(2)(A)

The lack of a supportable alternative cutoff date underlines the wisdom of determining a debtor’s exemption rights based on both the facts and the law in existence on the petition date.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor to claim a state-law homestead exemption from sale proceeds; the exemption does not give the debtor the residence’s postpetition appreciation.

Alsberg v. Robertson (In re Alsberg) · filed 1995-10-11(b)(2)(A)

Under the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A), a debtor may claim a homestead exemption for his residence, and the amount of the exemption may be determined by state law. ... Alsberg’s California homestead exemption can be realized only from the net proceeds of sale received by the estate. The estate held an interest in the residence at all times after the petition was filed. ... When Alsberg subsequently filed a claim for a $45,000 homestead exemption after the sale of the property, he became entitled to $45,000 of the proceeds, and no more.

Section 522(b) preserves a debtor’s exemption of entireties property claimed at filing despite a later divorce that changes the form of ownership.

In Re Martin · filed 2001-06-29(b)

Merely converting that interest into a fee simple non-entireties interest in the real estate cannot render the real estate nonexempt without doing violence to the en-tireties concept that each spouse is an indivisible owner of the whole parcel. ... The plain language of the statute stating, in effect, that § 522 trumps § 541, appears dispositive of this case.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) lets a debtor claim a state-law homestead exemption, but the exemption is realized from the estate's net sale proceeds rather than removing the residence or its postpetition appreciation from the estate.

In re Alsberg · filed 1995-10-11(b)(2)(A)

Alsberg's California homestead exemption can be realized only from the net proceeds of sale received by the estate.

Section 522(d)(1) permits an exemption for the debtor’s interest in real or personal property used as a residence, but it does not permit exempting proceeds from a prepetition sale of the homestead.

Kathy Ellen Richards · filed 2022-01-10(d)(1)

Simply put, the Court agrees with Trustee that there is no language in in 11 U.S.C. § 522(d)(1) that would permit the exemption of the proceeds from the prepetition sale of the Debtor’s homestead. In relevant part, §522(d)(1) provides for an exemption in “the debtor’s aggregate interest, not to exceed $25,150 in value, in real property or personal property that the debtor or a dependent of the debtor uses as a residence.” – The language of the Code is clear and unambiguous in this instance, vesting no exemption power in the proceeds arising out of the pre-petition sale of a debtor’s homestead.

When state exemptions apply under § 522(b)(2)(A), homestead sale proceeds remain exempt up to the statutory equity limit; a lower scheduled value does not cap the exemption.

In re Duffy · filed 1999-10-21(b)(2)(A)

11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A) defines exempt property which is “exempt under ... state or local law on the date of filing the petition.... ” ... The unsecured creditors have no right to reach the exempt equity in the property in bankruptcy and proceeds are exempt to the extent of the exemption, regardless of value.

Section 522(f) permits avoidance of a judicial lien when it fixed on the debtor’s property interest and impairs an exemption the debtor would have been entitled to absent the lien.

In Re Cooper · filed 1995-10-12(f)

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(f), a debtor may avoid the fixing of a judicial lien on an interest of the debtor in property to the extent that such lien impairs an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled.

Under § 522(f), a debtor may avoid a judicial lien only after identifying a recognized exemption and showing that the lien impairs that exemption.

In Re Holland · filed 1997-04-11(f)

Bankruptcy Code Section 522(f) addresses the issue of hen avoidance, and it dictates that, “[njotwithstanding any waiver or exemptions, the debtor may avoid the fixing of a hen on an interest of the debtor in property to the extent that such hen impairs an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled ... if such hen is ... a judicial hen ....” 11 U.S.C. § 522(f). In order for a debtor to utilize the avoidance provision in § 522, he must first identify a recognized exemption, and second demonstrate that the judicial hen impairs the exemption.

Section 522(f)(1)(A) requires a judicial lien, an entitled exemption, impairment of that exemption, and a debtor’s interest in the property before lien avoidance is available.

In Re Johnson · filed 1997-12-16§ 522(f)(1)(A)

As a result, the requested relief under § 522 is denied.

A judicial lien is avoided only to the extent that it partially impairs the debtor’s exemption, rather than being avoided in its entirety whenever any impairment exists.

Sheth v. Affiliated Realty & Management Co. (In Re Sheth) · filed 1998-10-14§ 522(f)(1) and § 522(f)(2)(A)

This Court, therefore, holds that the plain language requires partial avoidance of a judicial lien to the extent there is only a partial impairment of the exemption.

Under § 522(f)(1), a debtor cannot avoid a judicial lien that attached before the debtor acquired the property interest.

In Re Johnson · filed 1999-03-24(f)(1)

Since Debtor did not possess the property interest prior to the time when the judicial lien attached in 1980, she can not avoid the fixing of the lien under 11 U.S.C. 522(f).

Section 522(f) supplies the standard for deciding whether a debtor may avoid a judicial lien impairing an exemption.

Taylor v. Taylor (In Re Taylor) · filed 1999-05-12§ 522(f)

Section 522(f) sets forth the standard for granting a motion to avoid such a lien.

A debtor may avoid a judicial lien impairing an exemption, but not to the extent the lien secures a debt to a spouse, former spouse, or child for alimony, maintenance, or support.

In Re Cannon · filed 2000-01-03(f)(1)(A)

Under 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(1)(A), a debtor may avoid the fixing of a lien that impairs an exemption if such lien is a judicial lien other than one securing a debt to a spouse, former spouse, or child of the debtor for alimony, maintenance, or support.

Section 522(f)(1)(A) allows a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that impairs an exemption to which the debtor is entitled.

In Re Mukhi · filed 2000-04-05(f)(1)(A)

Liens on exempt property may be avoided under 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(1)(A) which provides that a debtor may avoid the fixing of a judicial lien “on an interest of the debtor in property to the extent that such lien impairs an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled.” 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(1)(A).

Section 522(f)(1) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien only to the extent that the lien impairs an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled.

In Re Hunter · filed 2002-08-05(f)(1)

This is so because while a debtor may avoid a judicial lien pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(1), this right to do so is limited and he may avoid a lien only to the extent that the hen impairs an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled.

Section 522(f) requires the debtor to have a pre-existing ownership interest in property before a judicial lien fixes; a lien that attaches simultaneously with acquisition cannot be avoided.

In Re MacGillivray · filed 2002-10-29(f)

The critical inquiry is “whether the debtor ever possessed the interest to which the hen fixed, before it fixed.” ... The statute therefore requires that “the debtor have a pre-existing ownership interest in the property.” ... Because the creditor’s judgment lien attached to the subject property at the same time the debtor acquired it, there was never a fixing of a lien on an interest of the debtor as required under section 522(f).

Section 522(f)(1) gives a debtor a personal right to avoid a judicial lien independent of case administration, and the right is not barred by case closure absent prejudice.

Goswami v. MTC Distributing (In Re Goswami) · filed 2003-12-31(f)(1)

The bankruptcy court’s focus on matters of estate administration in the context of a § 522(f)(1) motion is misplaced for an additional reason. A debtor’s right to avoid a lien under § 522(f) is “a ‘personal’ right of the debtor which exists independent of case administration.” ... Lien avoidance actions are among the “various activities” that may occur after a case is closed. In the absence of prejudice, lien avoidance actions are not barred either by entry of a discharge order or the closing of the bankruptcy case.

Section 522(f) allows a debtor to avoid a judicial lien only to the extent that it impairs an exemption, as measured by the formula in § 522(f)(2)(A), so the non-impairing portion remains attached.

Denillo v. Iron & Glass Bank (In Re Denillo) · filed 2004-05-13(f)(1)(A), (f)(2)(A)

Unambiguous language appearing in § 522(f)(1)(A) and § 522(F)(2)(A) makes clear that debtor in this instance may avoid the judicial lien of Iron and Glass Bank only in part — i.e., to the extent of the impairment of debtor’s exemption. Section 522(f)(1)(A) permits a debtor to avoid the fixing of a lien on an interest of the debtor in property “to the extent of impairment of the exemption.” 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(1)(A). Section 522(f)(2)(A) provides that a judicial lien impairs an exemption “to the extent that” the sum of the judicial lien, all other liens against the property, and the amount of the exemption debtor could claim if there were no liens against the property exceeds the value of debtor’s interest in the property in the absence of any liens. 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(2)(A)..

Section 522(f)(1) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien when the debtor has a duly allowed exemption, and an untimely objecting lien creditor may not relitigate the debtor’s entitlement to that exemption in the lien-avoidance proceeding.

In Re Hahn · filed 1985-08-29(f)(1)

The wording of the statute does appear to bar the application of the estoppel argument in lien avoidance proceedings under § 522(f)(2), but to allow it in proceedings under § 522(f)(1). ... By contrast, however, § 522(f)(1) merely requires proof of an entitlement to an exemption (which is shown merely by a claim of exemption duly allowed in the case) and the existence of a judicial lien. ... The Congressional intent to undo the “race to the Courthouse,” and the lack of a more involved statutory test, evidence Congress’ intent to prohibit the relitigation of settled exemption disputes in the context of a § 522(f)(1) lien avoidance motion. Simply stated, if a judgment lien creditor does not properly litigate a debtor’s entitlement to the underlying exemption within the timeframe established under BANKR.R. 4003(b) and LOC.R.BANKR.P. (D.Minn.) 113(b), he is estopped from litigating that issue in the debtor’s ensuing motion under § 522(f)(1).

Section 522(f)(1) does not allow a debtor to avoid a judicial lien when the debtor cannot claim the homestead exemption the lien would impair.

In re Johnson · filed 1990-03-20(f)(1)

In that the Court finds that Debtor is not able to claim a homestead exemption and concurrently avail herself of the avoidance powers of 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(1), Debtor’s Motion to Avoid Lien of Nu West Florida, Inc., is DENIED.

Section 522(f)(1) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien when any potential future enforcement of that lien presently impairs an otherwise available homestead exemption.

In Re Watson · filed 1990-06-27(f)(1)

However, the Court concludes that any potential enforcement of a *839 judgment lien in the future is a present impairment of the exemption.

Section 522(f)(1) permits avoidance of a judicial lien only to the extent it impairs the debtor’s exemption, so the lien cannot be avoided beyond the exemption amount.

David Dorsey Distributing, Inc. v. Sanders (In Re Sanders) · filed 1993-07-08(f)(1)

Although there is some support for the bankruptcy court’s decision, this court is convinced that the bankruptcy court’s ruling was an incorrect interpretation of § 522(f)(1). This court does not agree that Dorsey’s entire lien should be avoided. Under a plain reading of § 522(f)(1), a debtor’s exemption is impaired only to the extent a judicial lien attaches to the otherwise exempt property interest and prevents the debtor from getting the benefit of his exemption. ... Accordingly, this court finds that § 522(f)(1) does not permit the Debtor to avoid Dorsey’s judicial lien beyond the Debtor’s $12,-701.50 exemption, assuming that the lien impairs the exemption.

Section 522(f)(1)(A) lets a debtor avoid a judicial lien impairing an exemption, and § 522(f)(2)(A)(ii) requires all other liens on the property to be included in the impairment calculation without equitable apportionment for hypothetical subrogation.

Milgard Tempering, Inc. v. Darosa (In Re Darosa) · filed 2004-12-15(f)(2)(A)(ii)

We will not, however, adjust the mathematical formula of section 522(f)(2) as a matter of equity to provide for hypothetical events. That section “should be interpreted according to its plain meaning.” ... Section 522(f)(2)(A)(ii) specifically requires a court to consider “all other liens on [a debtor’s] property” when calculating whether a lien impairs an exemption; it does not provide a mechanism for excluding non-avoided recorded liens from the calculation, nor does it .permit adjustments based on liens that also encumber property belonging to others. We are bound to follow the statutory calculation.

Section 522(f)(2)'s impairment formula uses the property's value as of the bankruptcy petition date when determining whether a judicial lien impairs an exemption.

In Re Hall · filed 2005-06-20(f)(2)

Those courts that have considered the question have apparently uniformly held that the appropriate time for determining the value of the property subject to a hen which the Debtors seek to avoid under § 522(f) is the date on which the petition was filed. ... Two principles underlie the choice of the date of filing as the appropriate point in time at which to value the property for lien avoidance purposes. ... Recognizing that, by applying the same set of facts which would have been before the Court had the motion been filed at that time seems appropriate, limited only by the application of equitable principles when the delay and change in circumstances result in undue prejudice to the creditor.

Section 522(f) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien to the extent that it impairs an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled, and a postpetition move before closing does not necessarily abandon a homestead exemption.

In re May · filed 2005-08-26(f)

Simply put, the question before the Court is whether the Debtors’ actions after filing the petition resulted in the loss of the homestead exemption. ... The Court cannot find, on the facts of this case, that entering into a purchase and sale agreement while still occupying the premises and then subsequently moving from the premises prior to the closing constitutes an abandonment of the homestead. ... The Court, having found that the Debtors’ have a homestead exemption, finds that the Debtors’ motion to avoid lien complies with the other provisions of § 522(f), that the Debtors’ exemption is impaired and grants the motion to avoid lien of WGSB.

Section 522(f)(1)(A) permits a debtor to avoid an impairing judicial lien, while allowing the lienholder to challenge the debtor’s claimed exemption in response to the avoidance motion even if it did not timely object under Rule 4003(b).

In Re Tinker · filed 2006-11-13(f)(1)(A)

The denial of the right to assert the validity of the debtor’s exemption as a defense to a § 522(f) motion would defeat the secured creditor’s option not to participate in the bankruptcy case. ... This Court concludes that the Lienhold-ers are not precluded from challenging the Debtor’s claimed homestead exemption as a defense to the Lien Avoidance Motion.

Section 522(f)(1)(A) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien despite a later sale when the debtor had an interest in the property when the lien attached, and § 522(f)(2)(A) determines impairment by comparing the lien, other liens, and available exemption with the property’s value.

In Re Sheckard · filed 2008-02-06(f)(1)(A), (f)(2)(A)

I believe that I have jurisdiction to hear and decide the Avoidance Motion and that Mrs. Sheckard had standing to present it. First, I follow and rely upon the rationale of two other courts that recently held, quite directly, that a debtor need not have an ownership interest in liened property at the time the avoidance motion is filed. These courts ruled that a debtor need only have had some interest in the liened property at the time the lien attached. ... Third, the encumbering effect of the lien has been, in effect, transferred to the es-crowed proceeds of the sale. ... Section 522(f)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code prescribes that the amount of the lien to be avoided plus the amount of all other non-avoidable liens are combined with the homestead exemption and the sum is compared to the value of the property at issue. 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(2)(A). ... A judgment lien impairs a debtor’s exemption under Section 522(f)(2)(A) to the extent that (a) the sum of (i) the judgment hen, (ii) all other non-avoidable liens on the property, and (iii) the amount of the exemption that the debtor could, claim if no liens encumbered the property exceeds (b) the value of the property. ... Unifund’s lien is therefore avoided in its entirety.

Section 522(f)(1) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien impairing a homestead exemption when the lien and exemption attach simultaneously, with the homestead receiving priority.

In Re Perez · filed 2008-06-05(f)(1)

Under these circumstances, the Court concludes that upon the simultaneous imposition of the Judgment Creditor’s lien and the Debtor’s declared homestead exemption on the Property, the homestead status is entitled to priority and thus, the lien may be avoided under section 522(f).

Section 522(f)(2)(A) measures impairment using the exemption the debtor could claim if no liens existed, rather than merely the exemption actually claimed and allowed, and permits lien avoidance to the extent the statutory total exceeds the property's unencumbered value.

In Re Powell · filed 2008-11-06(f)(2)(A)

The Court does not agree that the Debtor is limited to her claimed exemptions on Schedule C for purposes of lien avoidance under § 522(f). ... The statutory language specifically mandates the bankruptcy court in hen avoidance proceedings look at the exemption the Debtor “could claim,” not the exemption actually claimed and allowed. ... The Spahrs’ lien, therefore, should be avoided in its entirety as the Debtor’s claimed exemption is totally impaired.

Section 522(f)(1) permits a debtor with an available exemption to avoid a judicial lien on the debtor’s interest in entireties property to the extent the lien impairs that exemption, only as to the filing debtor’s interest, with § 522(f)(2)(A) supplying the impairment calculation.

Raskin v. Susquehanna Bank (In re Raskin) · filed 2014-02-12(f)(1), (f)(2)(A)

Applying these restrictions at face value, the conclusion is inescapable that only one spouse can use the Homestead Exemption and, in the case of property owned as tenants by the entire-ties, that spouse is limited to avoiding a joint lien only to the extent that it attaches to his or her aggregate interest in the property and impairs his or her exemption.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) requires calculating impairment by adding the exemptions and liens against the property and avoiding only the portion of a judicial lien that exceeds the property's remaining value.

Prangley v. Cokinos · filed 2014-05-07(f)(2)(A)

In calculating the extent of avoidance under § 522(f)(2)(A), the bankruptcy court adds the exemptions permitted on the subject property, any consensual liens encumbering the property (usually mortgages), and any other liens encumbering the property (judicial liens in this case).

Section 522(f)(2)(A) measures impairment by adding the judicial lien, all other liens, and the exemption amount, then comparing that sum with the value of the debtor’s interest in the property without liens.

Ross v. Garcia (Garcia) · filed 2015-06-24(f)(2)(A)

Section 522(f)(2)(A) specifically provides: ... (i) the lien; ... (ii) all other liens on the property; and ... (iii) the amount of the exemption that the debtor could claim if there were no liens on the property; ... exceeds the value that the debtor’s interest in the property would have in the absence of any liens. ... “The ‘petition date is the operative date for determining the various § 522(f) calculations.’ ... “In § 522, ‘value’ means fair market value as of the date of the filing of the petition.... ” ... Accordingly, the bankruptcy court’s conclusion that the value of the Property was $635,000.00 was not clearly erroneous.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) defines impairment of an exemption by comparing the sum of the judicial lien, other liens, and the exemption amount with the value of the debtor’s interest absent liens.

Hines v. Scottsboro Investment Group, LLC (In re Hines) · filed 2017-01-10(f)(2)(A)

Under § 522(f), a debtor may avoid the fixing of a judicial lien on the debtor’s interest in property to the extent that the lien impairs the debt- or’s exemption in the property. ... The statutory formula for calculating the extent to which a lien impairs an exemption is set forth in 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(2)(A) which provides as follows: ... (iii) the amount of the exemption that the debtor could claim if there were no liens on the property; exceeds the value that the debtor’s interest in the property would have in the absence of any liens.

Section 522(f) authorizes the debtor to avoid a judicial lien impairing an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled, and a non-debtor probate representative may not invoke that relief when the debtor had not initiated the motion.

In re Boddy · filed 2018-11-02(f)

Section 522(f) permits the "debtor" to avoid a judicial lien which impairs exemptions to which the debtor would be entitled. Ms. Irwin has failed to provide the Court with persuasive legal authority to extend the relief afforded by that Section of the Bankruptcy Code to Ms. Irwin. ... Here, the Debtor had not filed the Motions before she died. With no action pending, Ms. Irwin cannot be "substituted" for a deceased "party." ... Ms. Irwin has failed to demonstrate that she is entitled to stand before this Court and avail herself of Section 522(f). The statute explicitly provides that the "debtor" may avoid the fixing of a lien against exempt property and she has submitted no legal authority to conclude otherwise.

Section 522(f)(2) permits partial avoidance of a judicial lien impairing a debtor’s exemption, and the lienholder is not entitled to later nonexempt appreciation in the residence.

Chiu v. Rosen · filed 2018-11-19(f)(2)

The BAP correctly applied 11 U.S.C. § 522(f) and Hanger v. Bank of America (In re Hanger), 196 F.3d 1292 (9th Cir. 1999) (order), aff’g & adopting 217 B.R. 592 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1997). ... Rosen’s judicial lien was partially avoided under 11 U.S.C. § 522(f), and he was not entitled to any nonexempt appreciation in Chiu’s residence.

Section 522(f)(1) lets a debtor avoid a judicial lien to the extent it impairs an exemption, and § 522(f)(2)(A)'s formula controls impairment even when state law limits enforcement.

In re Tapia · filed 2019-02-11(f)(1), (f)(2)(A)

Assuming arguendo that McKnight's judgment lien did not attach to the Homestead, it nevertheless impairs the exemption and is subject to avoidance under § 522(f).

Section 522(f)(1)(A) permits avoidance of a judicial lien only to the extent it impairs a debtor’s exemption, and § 522(f)(2)(A) measures that impairment by the statutory sum-of-liens-and-exemption formula.

Terry L Littig · filed 2019-07-19(f)(1)(A), (f)(2)(A)

There is no fair reading of the statute that would support avoiding a judicial lien beyond the amount necessary to protect a debtor’s exemption. ... Where there is equity remaining that supports a lien in part, that amount of the lien should not be avoided.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) measures exemption impairment by adding all liens and the exemption amount and comparing that total with the debtor’s unencumbered property interest; the lien is avoidable to the extent the total exceeds that interest.

Paul Fiano, Sr. · filed 2019-09-25(f)(2)(A)

Fiano may “avoid the fixing of a lien on [Fiano's Interest] in [The P]roperty to the extent that such lien impairs an exemption to which [he] would have been entitled” under the applicable exemption statutes. 11 U.S.C. § 522(f). A lien impairs an exemption if the sum of all liens on the Property, including the lien under consideration, together with the value that Fiano could claim as exempt in the absence of liens on the Property, exceeds the value of Fiano’s Interest in the Property if there were no liens on the Property. 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(2)(A).

Section 522(f)(2) determines lien impairment by adding the lien, other liens, and the hypothetical exemption, then subtracting the debtor's unencumbered property value; a lien that does not impair the exemption cannot be avoided.

Mary Katheryn Bryant · filed 2019-11-05(f)(2)

“Section 522(f)(2) provides a formula for calculating the extent to which a lien impairs an exemption: add the lien, all other liens on the property, and the ‘amount of the exemption that the debtor could claim if there were no liens on the property’ and then subtract from that amount the value of the debtor’s interest in the property in the absence of any liens.” Katz v. Pike (In re Pike), 243 B.R. 66, 71 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 1999).

Section 522(f)(2)(A) determines the amount of a judicial lien that impairs an exemption by comparing the lien, other liens, and the exemption to the debtor’s unencumbered property interest.

Steven J. West and Kelly O. West · filed 2020-01-15(f)(2)(A)

To determine whether a lien impairs a claimed exemption to which a debtor would have otherwise been entitled, the fair market value of the property at issue must established. ... (2)(A) for the purposes of this subsection, a lien shall be considered to impair an exemption to the extent that the sum of – (i) the lien; (ii) all other liens on the property; and (iii) the amount of the exemption that the debtor could claim if there were no liens on the property; exceeds the value that the debtor’s interest in the property would have in the absence of any liens. ... Accordingly, the Court will enter a separate Order in conformity with this Opinion avoiding Redstone’s judicial lien by the extent to which it impairs the Debtors’ exemptions in the amount of $3,640.54 as calculated pursuant to § 522(f)(2)(A).

Section 522(f)(2)(A) measures the extent to which a lien impairs an exemption by the value of the lien and the debtor’s interest in the property on the petition date.

O'Hara v. United States Trustee · filed 2020-12-15(f)(2)(A)

Under § 522(f)(2)(A), the extent to which a lien impairs an exemption depends on the value of the lien and the debtor’s interest in the property on the petition date.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) determines whether a judicial lien impairs an exemption by adding the lien being avoided, other liens on the property, and the exemption amount that could be claimed absent liens; if that total does not exceed the property's unencumbered value, the lien does not impair the exemption.

Brandon Scott Tulloh and Brandi Lyn Tulloh · filed 2021-06-21(f)(2)(A)

Under the lien avoidance formula set out in 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(2)(A), to determine if the Tullohs’ exemptions are impaired by the judicial liens, the Court must evaluate the total of the liens sought to be avoided, all other liens on the property, and the exemptions. The total value of the Tullohs’ real property is $262,000. The mortgage lien impairing the Country Cove property totals $206,000. The Tullos claimed exemptions in the total amount of $52,024. Totaled, the amount of the lien and the exemptions is $258,024. This is less than the real value of the property, and as such, at least $3,976 in equity remains. This is equity to which the Beacon Sales Lien can attach. Furthermore, because of the equity, the Beacon Sales Lien does not impair the Tullohs’ exemptions.

Section 522(f) permits avoidance of a judicial lien only by a debtor entitled to exempt property.

In Re. Roberta Newell, Estate of · filed 2022-05-04(f)

To take advantage of the Bankruptcy Code’s provision for avoiding a judicial lien, the party must be a debtor entitled to exempt property. ... Here, the Probate Estate is not the debtor. The relief requested therefore was not available to it.

Section 522(f) permits avoidance of a judicial lien only to the extent it impairs an exemption, and a motion seeking that relief must identify the liened property, its value, other liens, and the claimed exemption amount.

Paula Reed · filed 2022-07-27(f)

Even if property is exempt and the lien is avoidable, a judicial lien is only avoided “to the extent that such lien impairs an exemption. . .” ... In other words, lien avoidance is not always absolute. If an exemption is limited in amount, and there is equity in the asset above the exemption amount, the lien remains in place as to that equity. ... Accordingly, a lien avoidance motion must identify “the property subject to the judicial lien, [. . .] the value of the property, the amount due on account of all liens against it, and the amount of the exemption claimed by the debtor.”

Section 522(f)(2)(A) requires calculating impairment by adding the judicial lien, other liens, and the applicable exemption, then subtracting the property's unencumbered value; only the impaired portion of the lien may be avoided.

Mary E. Morosetti · filed 2026-02-13(f)(2)(A)

To prove that a judicial lien impairs an exemption, section 522(f)(2)(A) requires a two-step process. The movant must first add together (i) the amount of the lien, (ii) the amounts of all other liens on the property, and (iii) the amount of the exemption the debtor could claim if there were no liens on the property. Next, the movant must show the value of the debtor’s interest in the property absent any encumbrances. An impairment exists when the sum from step one exceeds the figure from step two. ... Avoidance under section 522(f) is not an “all-or-nothing” exercise. Only the portion of a judicial lien that interferes with the debtor’s exemption is avoidable. Any portion that does not impair the exemption survives unaffected.

Section 522(f) permits avoidance of a judicial lien only when it impairs the debtor’s exemption.

Hackett v. Commercial Banking Corp. (In Re Hackett) · filed 1982-10-15(f)

Suffice it to say that the Court, in the original Opinion, declined to avoid a judicial lien on the debtor’s residence on the basis that the exemption was not impaired as required by the Bankruptcy Code. See, 11 U.S.C. § 522(f). The debtor filed a motion for reconsideration on the basis that the judgment was founded on an error of law. After review of the memorandum of law submitted by the debtor, the Court will deny the motion for reconsideration and affirm the original ruling.

Section 522(f)(1) permits avoidance of a judicial lien only to the extent it impairs an exemption; the lien remains against nonexempt equity.

In Re Chandler · filed 1987-07-24(f)(1)

Therefore, we shall enter an Order concluding that DPW has properly revived judgment nos. 7184 and 7185 and holding that they may not be avoided to the extent of $3,000.00, $1,500.00 as to each Debtor, or $750.00 for each Debtor per judgment.

Section 522(f) does not authorize a bankruptcy court to decide whether a judgment lien will attach to proceeds of a future sale when the lien has not impaired the debtor’s exemption in the bankruptcy case.

In re Bird · filed 1988-03-11(f)

The essential point is that this court should not now attempt that future determination and any effort to do so would exceed the reasonable scope of the jurisdiction granted under § 522(f).

Section 522(f) allows a debtor to void a judgment lien that impairs an applicable homestead exemption.

In Re Giarrizzo · filed 1991-06-17(f)

A separate order has accordingly issued overruling A & J’s objection to the plan and voiding its judgment lien pursuant to § 522(f).

Section 522(f)(1) does not allow a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that attached before the debtor acquired the relevant interest in the property.

In Re Esposito · filed 1991-10-16(f)(1)

The judicial liens of Ms. Remo attached to the marital home prior to Debt- or receiving his interest as a tenant in common, consequently, her judgment liens are not avoidable.

Section 522(f) does not provide for avoidance of a judgment lien on real property when the debtor owns no real property.

In Re Norvell · filed 1996-07-31(f)

While this case does not directly concern a § 522(f) lien avoidance motion, the holding in this proceeding is directly applicable in such cases. Therefore, this Court, for the reasons set forth above, shall not “avoid” judgment liens on real property in cases where the debtor owns no real property.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) treats a judicial lien as impairing an exemption to the extent the lien, other liens, and exemption amount exceed the property’s unencumbered value.

Corson v. Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance (In Re Corson) · filed 1997-03-13(f)(2)(A)

In the present case, the calculation of impairment under Section 522(f)(2)(A) is relatively straightforward — the Court must simply determine and aggregate the amounts represented by subsections (i) — (iii), and then compare that sum to the value of the Debt- or’s unencumbered fee simple interest in the Residence.

Section 522(f)(2) addresses when a judicial lien impairs an exemption for purposes of setting the exemption off judicially.

Howard v. Tipton (In Re Howard) · filed 1982-12-21(f)(2)

An exemption is setoff judicially only when the exemption right is impaired, one context being 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(2) as in Greenhill.

Section 522(f)(1) does not permit a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that attached to property before the debtor acquired an interest in it.

In Re Sprick · filed 1987-09-18(f)(1)

This Court must agree with at least the premise proffered by the creditor, a judicial lien which attaches to an interest in property prior to the debtor’s acquisition of that interest in property is not avoidable under section 522(f)(1).

Section 522(f) allows a Colorado debtor to avoid a judicial lien on exempt real property when the lien impairs the homestead exemption, even if state law prevents the lien from attaching to the exempt portion.

Packer v. General Motors Acceptance Corp. (In Re Packer) · filed 1989-01-11(f)

In accord with my previous decision in In re Hermansen, I shall allow, in the instant case, the Debtor to invoke Section 522(f) of the Bankruptcy Code and to avoid, in its entirety, the Creditor’s judicial lien on the real property.

Section 522(f)(1) permits avoidance of a judicial lien only when it attaches to property and impairs the debtor’s exemption.

In re Ray · filed 1989-08-28(f)(1)

The judicial lien granted to Mrs. Ray pursuant to the Judgment Entry does not attach to the personal property of Debtor pursuant to Missouri law, nor does the judicial lien otherwise impair the exemptions claimed by Debtor. Therefore, the judicial lien does not impair Debtor’s exemptions and need not be avoided pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 522(f)(1).

Section 522(f) lets a debtor avoid only the portion of a judicial lien that impairs an exemption, by subordinating it to the exemption while preserving the lien's value.

Bellenoit v. Avco Leasing Services (In Re Bellenoit) · filed 1992-12-11(f)

It permits the Debtor to avoid the fixing of a lien “to the extent that such lien impairs an exemption.” 11 U.S.C. § 522(f).

Section 522(f) lets a debtor avoid a judicial lien impairing an exemption, while allowing the secured creditor to challenge the exemption in defense.

In Re Maylin · filed 1993-06-09(f)

Taylor extends as far as its holding, but not as far as its dictum. It confirms Rule 4003(b)’s deadline for exemption objections made by the bankruptcy trustee (and the unsecured creditors who look to the estate for payment). Its rule does not foreclose a secured creditor from defending a § 522(f) or § 522(h) action by denying that the property involved is exempt under applicable law. Notwithstanding Rule 4003(b) and Taylor, affected secured creditors may contest the bona fides of an exemption in defense of a § 522(f) lien avoidance motion.

Section 522(f)(1) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien only up to the lesser of the available exemption or the debtor’s equity in the property.

In Re Menell · filed 1993-11-08(f)(1)

Based on the language of section 522(f)(1), the court holds that the debtor may avoid FNB’s judicial lien to the extent that it impairs his exemption, i.e. $2100.

Section 522(f)(1) permits avoidance of a judicial lien only to the extent it impairs an exemption; an Illinois judgment lien does not impair the homestead exemption because that exemption is carved out of the lien.

In Re Jones · filed 1994-04-22(f)(1)

Therefore, construing the plain meaning of Section 522(f)(1) and the interaction of Illinois law, the Debtors’ homestead exemption is not impaired because it is carved out of Pinnacle Bank’s judgment lien.

Section 522(f)(1) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien to the extent it impairs an exemption to which the debtor is entitled.

In re Shurtleff · filed 1994-07-14(f)(1)

Carr’s liens on the Accounts, on the other hand, are judicial liens which may be avoided pursuant to Code § 522(f)(1) to the extent that it is determined that they impair an exemption to which the Debtors are entitled.

Section 522(f) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien impairing an exemption when a judicial sale is pending at the time the debtor claims the exemption in bankruptcy.

In Re Shells · filed 1994-07-22(f)

As a result, a judicial sale was “pending” when the debtors claimed their exemption in bankruptcy court, and the debtors may utilize the avoiding power of § 522(f) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 522(f)(1) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien only to the extent it impairs an exemption the debtor can establish, even when no one objected to a broader claimed exemption.

In Re Page · filed 1994-08-15(f)(1)

Under section 522(f)(1), the debtor may avoid the fixing of a judicial lien only to the extent that the lien impairs an exemption. ... The debtor must reestablish exemptability when seeking to avoid a lien. ... The debtor cannot sustain this burden because she can only exempt one-half of the check.

Section 522(f)(1) does not allow a debtor to avoid a judicial lien against a New York homestead when the debtor has no equity and therefore no state homestead exemption to impair.

In Re Corio · filed 1995-12-29(f)(1)

Because Debtor has no equity in the Property, he has no homestead exemption that could be impaired by the judicial liens he seeks to avoid; consequently, the judicial liens cannot be avoided under Bankruptcy Code § 522(f).

Under the pre-1994 version of § 522(f), a debtor could avoid a judicial lien only to the extent of the dollar value of the claimed exemption.

Holloway v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance · filed 1996-04-25(f)(1)

Applying Wrenn to the case before us, the Holloways can avoid John Hancock's lien on their residence only to the extent of their homestead exemption. Because the Holloways' claimed exemption was worth $0.00, they are not entitled to any lien avoidance.

Section 522(f)(1)(A) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that impairs an exemption in tenancy by the entirety property.

In Re Allard · filed 1996-05-09(f)(1)(A)

Because Great Southern’s lien will remain on the Property if not avoided, it impairs the Debtor’s exemptions claimed in the Property. Consequently, the lien is subject to avoidance under § 522(f)(1)(A).

Section 522(f) provides no lien to avoid when state homestead law prevents a judgment lien from attaching to the property.

In Re McRoy · filed 1996-12-20(f)

Since the judgment lien did not attach to the Kansas homestead, it did not “fix on an interest of the debtor” in an exempt homestead and “impair” the exemption as required by § 522(f).

Section 522(f)(1)(A) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that impairs an exemption even when the debtor has no equity above the homestead exemption.

In Re VanZant · filed 1997-07-17(f)(1)(A)

The Court finds, therefore, that the creditor’s lien in this case “fixed” on an “interest of the debtor in property” even though she lacked any equity in the property above the amount of her homestead exemption. All the elements of avoidability under § 522(f)(1)(A) are satisfied, and the debtor is entitled to avoid the creditor’s lien in its entirety.

Section 522(f)(1)(A) allows a debtor to avoid a judicial lien impairing property that became exempt because no one timely objected, even if state law would not have allowed the exemption.

In Re Youngblood · filed 1997-09-16(f)(1)(A)

To hold that this incontestably exempt property remains subject to a hen which impairs the exemption and gobbles up the withheld money would contradict that which the Seventh Circuit and the Supreme Court have clearly mandated. ... Thus, Debtor may avoid this lien pursuant to § 522(f)(1)(A).

Section 522(f)(2) permits avoidance of a judicial lien only to the extent the lien impairs the debtor’s exemption.

Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. Hanger (In Re Hanger) · filed 1997-11-17(f)(2)

Thus, the bank’s lien of $92,565 may be avoided only to the extent of $59,382 because that is the extent of the impairment of the exemption by the bank’s lien.

Section 522(f)(1) allows a debtor to avoid a previously recorded judicial lien that attaches to a later-acquired homestead when the lien was not created as part of the debtor’s property interest.

In Re Pederson · filed 1997-12-01(f)(1)

The Court reads this passage to mean that § 522(f)(1) may not be used to avoid a judgment hen that is created as part and parcel of the creation of the interest that it encumbers. Thus, a state legislature may not immunize judgment hens that have no logical connection with the interest acquired from avoidance under § 522(f)(1) by enacting statutes that state that a judgment hen is deemed to attach to the judgment debtor’s real property simultaneously with the debt- or’s acquisition of the property interest.

Section 522(f)(2)(A)’s impairment formula permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien only to the extent it impairs an exemption, which may result in partial avoidance.

In Re Plott · filed 1998-01-12(f)(2)(A)

In the case at bar, however, the formula allows for only the partial avoidance of First National’s lien.

Section 522(f)(1) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that impairs a homestead exemption the debtor would have been entitled to without the lien.

Euber v. Sheldrick (In Re Euber) · filed 1998-03-02(f)(1)

So, we ask, would avoiding Creditor’s lien entitle Debtors to a homestead exemption? The answer is yes. Accordingly, we will avoid the lien.

Section 522(f)(1)(A) allows a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that impairs a homestead exemption, even if state law permits the lien to attach.

Matter of McMasters · filed 1998-04-17(f)(1)(A)

Therefore, the judgment hen held by Ms. Pylant impairs the homestead exemption and can be avoided by Ms. McMasters.

Section 522(f)(1)(A) does not allow a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that does not impair the debtor’s exemption in entireties property.

Giles v. Chevy Chase Bank FSB (In Re Giles) · filed 1998-07-01(f)(1)(A)

The Creditors’ hens do not attach to any present interest of the Debtors. As a practical matter, the liens do not impair the exemption claimed in any respect. The Debtors may sell the property free of the existing liens and use the proceeds as they will.

Section 522(f)(1) does not permit a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that never attached to the debtor’s exempt homestead under applicable state law.

McCart v. Jordana (In Re Jordana) · filed 1999-04-16(f)(1)

Therefore, McCart’s lien does not attach to the Debtor’s homestead and he cannot avoid it under § 522(f)(1).

Section 522(f)(2)(A) permits full avoidance of a judicial lien that fully impairs a debtor’s exemption; a hypothetical marshaling of collateral does not change the statutory calculation.

In Re Pray · filed 1999-12-20(f)(2)(A)

Because a marshaling order is premature in the absence of an actual liquidation, and for the other reasons set forth below, the Court concludes that the defense is not available against the debtor’s motion pursuant to section 522(f)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code. The Court therefore holds that the creditor’s judicial lien fully impairs the debtor’s exemption under the statutory formula and is void in its entirety.

Section 522(f)(1) does not permit a debtor to avoid a judicial lien on wages in which the debtor had no interest when the bankruptcy case began.

Baker v. Kas Enterprises (In Re Baker) · filed 2000-03-09(f)(1)

In the absence of any other Debtor interest in these wages, the Debtor cannot avoid the judicial lien on these funds under Section 522(f)(1) because at the commencement of the case, she had no interest in the wages to which the judicial lien had attached.

Section 522(f) permits avoidance of a judicial lien that arose after its enactment without a taking of the lienholder’s property.

In Re Homonoff · filed 2001-04-17(f)

Again, because it is federal bankruptcy law, specifically Section 522(f), that makes Citizens’ lien avoidable, there is no taking because Citizens’ lien came into being long after the enactment of Section 522(f).

Section 522(f)(1)(A) does not permit a debtor to avoid a judicial lien when the debtor acquired the property interest at the same time the lien arose.

In Re Tumminello · filed 2001-10-15(f)(1)(A)

Sharon’s interest in the real estate did not exist prior to the creation of the judicial lien on the real property. Accordingly, Sharon cannot avoid the lien under § 522(f)(1)(A) and her objection to James’ claim is overruled.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) uses a debtor’s equity in jointly owned property to determine how much of a judicial lien impairs an exemption.

In Re Ware · filed 2001-10-26(f)(2)(A)

From this context, the Court concludes it should reexamine its view on this issue and follow the debtor’s equity approach.

Under the version of § 522(f)(1) in effect when the bankruptcy petition was filed, lien avoidance was limited to the lesser of the debtor’s equity or homestead exemption.

Chemical Bank v. James · filed 2002-08-20(f)(1)

We concur with the trial court's interpretation of In re Menell, 37 F. 3d 113 (3d Cir.1994) concerning the limitation of the trustee's avoidance powers to the lesser of the amount of the value of the debtor's equity or of the amount of his homestead exemption by application of the version of 11 U.S.C.A. § 522(f)(1) in effect at the time of filing of defendant's bankruptcy petition.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien in full when the statutory formula shows impairment greater than the lien, regardless of state lien priority.

In Re Newell · filed 2004-03-19(f)(2)(A)

Pursuant to a literal application of § 522(f)(2)(A), Pikes Peak’s judicial lien impairs the Debtor’s exemption to the extent of $76,000.00, which is greater than the total amount of Pikes Peak’s judicial lien, and Pikes Peak’s judicial lien must be avoided in its entirety.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) calculates impairment by comparing the sum of the judicial lien, other liens, and the available exemption with the property’s value; a judicial lien is fully avoidable when the impairment exceeds the lien.

In re May · filed 2006-04-03(f)(2)(A)

The amount of the judicial lien is $7,100.00 and the extent of impairment is $28,161.55. Because the extent of impairment is greater than the amount of the judicial lien, the lien is avoidable in its entirety.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) permits full avoidance of judicial liens when the calculated impairment of an exemption exceeds the liens’ value.

In Re Jerew · filed 2009-01-30(f)(2)(A)

In this case, therefore, since the extent of the Debtors’ impairment of their exemption, $395,236.66, exceeds the value of the judicial liens held by the Fa-hey Bank, $226,024.66, the liens are subject to avoidance in full.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) requires courts to use its lien impairment formula regardless of whether the underlying debt is dischargeable.

Treadwell v. Glenstone Lodge, Inc. (In Re Treadwell) · filed 2010-02-01(f)(2)(A)

The dischargeability of a loan is irrelevant to the avoidance of a lien under § 522(f)(1) and § 522(f)(2)(A). In order to determine whether a lien is avoidable pursuant to § 522(f)(1), a bankruptcy court must apply the statutory formula provided in § 522(f)(2)(A).

Section 522(f)(1) allows a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that impairs an exemption even if the underlying debt is nondischargeable, unless the debt receives preferred treatment under § 522(c).

In Re Davenport · filed 2011-01-12(f)(1)

There is no exception in subsection (f) for a lien arising from a nondischargeable debt unless that debt is among those reserved for preferred treatment under § 522(c).

Section 522(f)(1)(A) does not permit a debtor to avoid a judicial lien if the debtor acquired the property interest at issue after the lien attached.

In Re White · filed 2011-04-29(f)(1)(A)

The debtors never possessed their interests as tenants in common or in fee before Commercial Bank’s lien “fixed.” Thus, they may not use § 522(f)(1)(A) to avoid the lien.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) does not permit a debtor to avoid a judicial lien on property in which the debtor has claimed no exemption.

Povah v. Hansbury & Finn, Inc. (In Re Povah) · filed 2011-08-22(f)(2)(A)

Moreover, to the extent the claims listed by the Debtor on Schedule D constitute judicial liens, they may not be avoided as she has not claimed an exemption of her interest in the Property.

Section 522(f)(2) allows a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that impairs an exemption even when a lower-priority, unavoidable mortgage contributes to the impairment.

Leach v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage (In Re Leach) · filed 2011-10-21(f)(2)

Finally, the Court holds that the foregoing analysis is the appropriate one even though Northwestern Mutual’s judicial lien enjoys priority over Wells Fargo’s mortgage. The Court so holds because (a) Wells Fargo’s mortgage is unavoidable by the Debtor under § 522(f), (b) Northwestern Mutual’s judicial lien is thereby avoidable, and (c) a debtor, as a matter of law, can avoid a higher priority judicial lien if the same impairs such debtor’s exemption if the reason, in part, for such impairment is the existence of a lower priority unavoidable encumbrance (such as a mortgage).

Section 522(f)(1)(A) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that impairs a homestead exemption when the lien attached to an interest the debtor already held, even if divorce later changed how the property was held.

White v. Commercial Bank & Trust Co. · filed 2011-11-16(f)(1)(A)

The lien attached at a time the debtors each had an interest in the real estate and has remained fixed since that time. ... Since Commercial Bank’s lien on each of the debtor’s property now impairs the exemption to which each of them would be entitled, each of them is entitled to avoid the fixing of the judicial lien.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) defines impairment of an exemption for judicial lien avoidance under federal law, which conflicting state law cannot override.

In re Depascale · filed 2013-08-08(f)(2)(A)

The Bankruptcy Code establishes a uniform definition of impairment in § 522(f)(2)(A) without reference to conflicting state law provisions.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) requires a debtor seeking to avoid a judicial lien to prove that the property’s value on the petition date was less than the sum of the liens and the exemption.

In re Gucciardo · filed 2017-09-29(f)(2)(A)

In order to establish that the Judicial Lien impairs her exemption in the Property, the Debtor was required to demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the value of the Property as of the Petition Date was less than $766,576.78 (which is the sum of the Judicial Lien, other liens on the Property, and the Debt- or’s exemption). The Debtor has failed to meet this burden.

Section 522(f)(1) does not allow a debtor to avoid a judicial lien satisfied before the bankruptcy petition date because it no longer impairs an exemption on that date.

Elliott v. Pacific Western Bank · filed 2020-08-12(f)(1)

The perfected lien on Elliot’s IRA funds is not voidable under section 522(f) because the lien did not impair an interest in his property on the date he filed his chapter 7 bankruptcy petition.

Section 522(f)(1)(A) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that impairs an exemption, and the creditor may challenge the exemption in the lien avoidance proceeding.

Sara Lynn Rose-Brownfield · filed 2021-02-22(f)(1)(A)

As clearly stated in § 522(f)(1)(A) and in Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4003(b)(1), a judicial lien is avoidable if it impairs an exemption to which a debtor would be entitled, and a creditor may challenge a claim of exemption when debtor seeks to avoid its lien.

Section 522(f)(1)(A) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that impairs a properly claimed wildcard exemption in property the debtor owns, even if the debtor does not live there.

Joseph Banfi · filed 2021-06-09(f)(1)(A)

Therefore, the Bankruptcy Code unambiguously permits the avoidance of a judicial lien which impairs a properly claimed wildcard exemption.

Section 522(f)(2)(A) measures impairment by comparing the debtor’s interest in property with the total of the lien, other liens, and available exemption; a judicial lien is avoidable to the extent of the excess.

Jon Michael Hayes Shibley · filed 2023-03-29(f)(2)(A)

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the judicial lien held by Daniel Richard Smith against real property known as 770 and 780 Clubside Drive, Roswell, Georgia 30076 is avoided to the extent of $1,092,512.40, leaving in place a judicial lien in the amount of $75,487.60.

Section 522(f)(1)(A) cannot be used to avoid a judicial lien that did not attach to the debtor’s exempt property.

Slavko Perez Duzdevich · filed 2026-04-22(f)(1)(A)

Since 92 West does not have a lien over the Property, its lien is not subject to avoidance under section 522(f).

The court held that the ordinary Porsche was not a tool of the debtor’s trade, so its nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money lien was not avoidable under § 522(f)(1)(B)(ii).

In Re Juhasz · filed 1995-11-14(f)(1)(B)(ii)

The court concludes that the Vehicle is not a tool of the trade within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(l)(B)(ii).

A debtor may avoid a nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money lien on a tool of trade only when the property qualifies for the applicable exemption and the lien impairs that exemption.

In Re Erwin · filed 1996-08-23§ 522(f)(1)(B)(ii)

Section 522(f) of the bankruptcy code allows a debtor to avoid a lien on an interest of the debtor in property to the extent that such lien impairs an exemption to wMch the debtor would have been entitled under § 522(b) if the lien is a non-possessory, nonpurchase-money security interest in any implements, professional books, or tools of the trade of the debtor or the trade of a dependent of the debtor.