11 U.S.C. § 522

Section 522(e) applies only when an exemption is waived in favor of a creditor with an unsecured claim.

Ryan v. Brandon · filed 2017-04-25(e)

Second, 11 U.S.C. § 522(e) only applies to the waiver of an exemption in favor of a creditor with an “unsecured claim.” Trustee-Appellee Christy L. Brandon is neither an unsecured creditor nor holds an unsecured claim. Any incidental benefit to Bodeker’s creditors as a result of the stipulation does not render § 522(e) applicable to this case.

Section 522(e) makes a debtor’s waiver of exemptions in favor of a creditor holding an unsecured claim unenforceable as to property the debtor may exempt.

Gilman v. Barnett Bank of South Florida, N.A. (In Re Gilman) · filed 1983-07-29(e)

As to the affirmative defense of BARNETT asserting the waiver of exemption on the homestead property, the Court concludes that such a waiver is expressly prohibited under Section 522(e) of the United States Bankruptcy Code which states that “... a waiver of exemptions executed in favor of a creditor that holds an unsecured claim against the Debtor is unenforceable in a case under this Title with respect to such claim against property that the Debtor may exempt under subsection (b) of this section”.

Section 522 permits exemptions available under state law and does not restore exemptions validly waived before bankruptcy.

United States v. Scott · filed 1984-02-22(b)(2), (e), and (f)

Section 522 of the Bankruptcy Code provides that a debtor may exempt “any property that is exempt under ... State or local law.’’ 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2). The clear language of the statute indicates that one must have an exemption valid under state law before one can assert it in bankruptcy.

Section 522(f)(1)(A) lets a debtor avoid a judicial lien that impairs a bankruptcy exemption despite an unintentional prepetition waiver of state exemptions.

In re Quade · filed 2012-10-10(f)(1)(A)

The questions put to this court are different ones. May a debtor, as a matter of bankruptcy law, claim exemptions in those assets and, as a result, avoid any judicial liens that impair the exemptions? The answer is clearly yes. Does a debtor waive its bankruptcy exemptions by unintentional prepetition conduct? The answer is clearly no.

Section 522(e) makes an exemption waiver unenforceable against a judicial lienholder whose claim began as an unsecured debt.

Sean Rene Michael Burdette · filed 2023-07-25(e)

Given this history and purpose, reading § 522(e) and (f) together results in viewing a judicial lienholder as a “creditor that holds an unsecured claim” for purposes of § 522(e).

Section 522 lien-avoidance motions are contested matters requiring formal service, reasonable notice, and an opportunity for hearing.

Gene A Shy · filed 2020-02-19

A Motion to Avoid a Lien pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522 is a contested matter. As a contested matter, Fed. R. Bankr. R. 9014 applies and provides that the motion shall be served in the manner provided for service of a summons and complaint by Bankruptcy Rule 7004 and within the time determined under Bankruptcy Rule 9006(d). The Rule specifically provides that there must be reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing to be afforded the party against whom the relief is sought. That was not done in this case.

Section 522(d)(1) permits a debtor to exempt property used as a residence and does not limit the exemption to the debtor’s principal residence or homestead.

Agustin J Jaramillo and Lillian V Jaramillo · filed 2020-04-14(d)(1)

Congress could have limited the exemption in § 522(d)(1) to a debtor’s principal residence, but it did not. ... The statute contains no limiting modifier and, therefore, merely requires the debtor use the property as a residence in order to claim an exemption in such property under § 522(d)(1).

Section 522(d)(11)(E) covers compensation for lost future earnings, while section 522(d)(5) permits a capped exemption in any property.

Kobaly v. Slone (In Re Kobaly) · filed 1992-07-28(d)(11)(E), (d)(5)

The exemption of $154,100.00 claimed pursuant to § 522(d)(ll)(E) will be disallowed for several reasons. ... Consequently, debt- or’s exemption pursuant to § 522(d)(5) of $7,900.00 of the eminent domain award will be allowed.

Section 522(b) allows a debtor to exempt certain assets and use those assets to pay personal legal expenses.

In Re Lilliston · filed 1991-01-04(b)

Further, the Bankruptcy Code allows a debtor some resources to pay for such a defense, namely, assets which a debtor exempts under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b) and an individual debtor’s future earnings.

Section 522(b)(1) requires a debtor to choose either federal or state exemptions; a conflicting, ambiguous claim to a § 522(b)(3)(B) tenancy-by-the-entirety exemption may be disallowed or valued at zero under § 522(l).

Mahi Paturu · filed 2021-01-15(b)(1), (b)(3)(B), (l)

For the reasons set forth above, because the amended exemptions are ambiguous, this case is distinguishable from Taylor, and the exemption on the Property under section 522(b)(3)(B) must be disallowed. In the alternative, even if this Court has misapplied the holding of Taylor, and the exemption claimed pursuant to section 522(b)(3)(B) is allowed, the ambiguities of the schedules must be construed against Debtor and the Court finds that the value of the exemption is $0.00.

Section 522(b)(1) requires a debtor to choose either federal or state and federal nonbankruptcy exemptions, so choosing federal exemptions under § 522(b)(2) bars claiming an exemption under § 522(b)(3).

Atkinson, Trustee v. Paturu · filed 2021-01-15(b)(1)

Section 522(b)(1) statutorily requires a debtor to choose exemptions under either section 522(b)(2) or (b)(3), as does Schedule C. When Debtor chose to take his exemptions under section 522(b)(2), he then was statutorily limited from claiming any exemption under section 522(b)(3), thus the exemption would only be valid up to $0.00.

Section 522(b)(1) requires a debtor to choose either the federal exemptions under § 522(b)(2) or the state and federal nonbankruptcy exemptions under § 522(b)(3), so a debtor electing federal exemptions cannot also claim the § 522(b)(3)(B) tenancy-by-the-entirety exemption.

Mahi Paturu · filed 2021-01-15(b)(1)

Section 522(b)(1) statutorily requires a debtor to choose exemptions under either section 522(b)(2) or (b)(3), as does Schedule C. When Debtor chose to take his exemptions under section 522(b)(2), he then was statutorily limited from claiming any exemption under section 522(b)(3), thus the exemption would only be valid up to $0.00.

Section 522(b) allows a state to opt out of the federal exemption scheme, in which case debtors may claim only exemptions available under state law.

Moriah R Lewis and Bobby L Harrison · filed 2022-09-15(b)

Under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b), Oklahoma has opted out of the federal exemptions, limiting Debtors’ exemptions to those available under Oklahoma law.

Section 522(b) permits a debtor to claim either federal or state exemptions unless the debtor's state has opted out of the federal exemption scheme.

Adam L. Morris · filed 2023-01-13(b)

Debtors may employ exemptions under either federal law or state law, unless a state has chosen to “opt out” of the federal exemption scheme. In re O’Malley, 601 B.R. 629, 644 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2019); In re Rozenzweig, 245 B.R. 836, 839 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2000). Pursuant to § 12-1201 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, Illinois residents are “prohibited from using the federal exemptions provided in Section 522(d) of the Bankruptcy Code. . . .” 735 ILCS 5/12-120. Hence, the Debtor in this case is restricted to the exemptions provided by Illinois law.

Section 522(b)(1) permits a debtor to choose between the federal exemption scheme and applicable state law exemptions.

In re Lua · filed 2015-05-01(b)(1)

California residents filing for bankruptcy must choose from two sets of exemption options under state law. See 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(1); Cal.Civ.Proc.Code § 703.130; Flinn v. Morris (In re Steward), 227 B.R. 895, 898 (9th Cir. BAP 1998). “One set of exemptions are state law non-bankruptcy exemptions, including a homestead exemption,” and the “other set of exemptions is modeled closely upon the federal exemptions listed in § 522(d).” Id. A debtor may choose only one set of exemptions. Id.; see Cal.Civ.Proc.Code § 703.140(a).

Section 522(b)(1) provides a choice between federal exemptions under § 522(d) and applicable state exemptions, subject to the state’s authority to bar the federal choice.

In Re Volk · filed 1983-01-11(b)(1)

The law of the state that is applicable to the debtors in this case prohibits residents of South Dakota from claiming the federal exemptions provided in Section 522(d) of the Bankruptcy Code. ... South Dakota exemption law does not apply to the debtors. Therefore, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1472, venue of this matter is properly in this Court, and, pursuant to the alternative provisions of 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(1), the debtors are entitled to the federal exemptions under 11 U.S.C. § 522(d).

Section 522(b)(1) permits an individual debtor to claim applicable state-law exemptions, and § 522(l) requires the debtor to list the property claimed exempt; property not properly listed is not treated as exempt through the bankruptcy exemption process.

Linda Lee Stutsman · filed 2025-05-02(b)(1), (l)

To claim an exemption, a debtor must ... file a list of property ... claimed exempt, per 11 U.S.C. § 522(l). ... If a debtor files a list of property claimed as exempt under § 522(l), and no party in interest objects, ... then the property ... is exempt.

Section 522(b) permits a debtor to claim qualifying property as exempt, while § 522(l) makes a properly listed exemption effective if no party in interest objects; property not adequately listed remains in the estate.

Helms v. Zellmer · filed 2021-03-02(b), (l)

The debtor then may remove some of the property by claiming exemptions under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b). ... A debtor’s failure to claim an item of property as exempt in Schedule C means that the item passes automatically into the estate. “If the debtor does not claim an exemption with respect to particular property, the rule of inclusion stated in § 541 controls, and the property goes to the creditors.” ... The failure of a party in interest to object to a properly claimed exemption means that the property is exempt, “whether or not [the debtor] had a colorable statutory basis for claiming [the exemption].” ... Therefore, if the claimed exemption included the Auxiliary Plan, any objection was long since waived under § 522(l) and Bankruptcy Rule 4003(b)(1). But, if the claimed exemption did not include the Auxiliary Plan, then the Plan passed into the bankruptcy estate under § 541(a)—regardless of the exemption’s substantive merits.

Section 522(l) makes property claimed as exempt exempt unless a party in interest objects.

Frederick C. Lucius and Carliss Jean Lucius, Debtors-Appellants v. John C. McLemore Trustee-Appellee · filed 1984-08-23(l)

Moreover, under § 522(Z) the proposed exemptions are subject to objection by a party in interest.

Section 522(l) makes property claimed as exempt exempt unless a party in interest objects, and section 522(b)'s opt out applies only to federal exemptions under section 522(d).

North Carolina Baptist Hospitals, Inc. v. Howell (In Re Howell) · filed 1985-08-01(b), (l)

This court views the “opt out” provision of 11 U.S.C. § 522(b) as pertaining only to 11 U.S.C. § 522(d). Thus, the remainder of the Bankruptcy Act, and in particular Subsection 522(l), operates independently of Subsection 522(b). ... 11 U.S.C. § 522(l). This section provides no specific time limit for filing exemptions. ... When so done, it is clear that the federal provision, Subsection 522(Z), must be read independent of the state provision in order to resolve the inherent conflict between the two. ... Thus, where a time limitation or a lack of time limitation in a federal provision is different from a provision in state legislation, the federal legislation controls.

Section 522 permits a debtor to convert nonexempt assets into exempt assets, even on the eve of bankruptcy.

Egan v. Oliver (In Re Oliver) · filed 1984-03-05

While the Court recognizes that under § 522 it is perfectly proper and indeed may be good planning, for a debtor to convert non-exempt assets into those which are exempt, even on the eve of bankruptcy, the Court also recognizes that under 11 U.S.C. § 548(a) the same transfer may be avoided if: (1) the transfer occurred on or within one year of the filing of the petition, the debtor received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfer and the debtor was insolvent at the time of the transfer or was rendered insolvent thereby; or (2) the transfer made within the time period set forth above was made with the actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors.

Section 522 permits denial of an exemption when a debtor converts non-exempt property into exempt property with intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors.

In Re Elliott · filed 1987-11-04

The issue is not whether Debtor is entitled to claim this particular property as his homestead under Article X, Section 4, of the Florida Constitution. Rather, the matter before this Court is whether the Debtor should be denied this exemption under 11 U.S.C. § 522 to the extent he used business assets to pay off the mortgage on his home. ... It is generally recognized that a Debtor is entitled to convert non-exempt property into exempt property up until the filing of the bankruptcy petition. It is further recognized that this practice is not fraudulent per se. See In re Ford, 3 B.R. 559 (Bkrptcy.D.Md.1980). However, when the conversion is intended to defeat the interests of creditors, such exemptions may be denied to the extent of any fraudulent conduct. ... In order to prevail in this objection, Antle must prove that the conversion of business assets into exempt assets was undertaken with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors. ... Based upon the foregoing, Antle’s objection to exemption will be denied.

Section 522 permits a debtor to claim an otherwise available exemption after converting nonexempt property into exempt property before bankruptcy, absent actual intent to defraud creditors.

Kenneth Maynard Hanson & Lucille Esther Hanson v. First National Bank in Brookings, a Corporation · filed 1988-06-02(b)

Absent extrinsic evidence of fraud, however, the debtor’s mere conversion of non-exempt property to exempt property, even while insolvent, is not evidence of fraudulent intent as to creditors.

Under § 522(b), a New York-domiciled debtor may elect federal exemptions; § 522(d)(11)(D) covers qualifying personal-injury payments up to its statutory limit, and § 522(d)(5) covers a limited aggregate interest in any property.

Vladimir Reviss · filed 2021-05-06(b), (d)(11)(D), (d)(5)

For the reasons set forth herein and on the record of the April 6, 2021 hearing, and based on the entire record, the Court finds and concludes that the Debtor is entitled to be paid his full claimed exemption in the proceeds of his personal injury action, including his claimed exemption of $25,150, pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Section 522(d)(11)(D), and his claimed exemption of $13,890, pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Section 522(d)(5), totaling $39,040.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) selects the state-exemption law based on the debtor's domicile history, while the hanging paragraph permits federal exemptions under § 522(d) when that rule leaves the debtor without an available exemption; § 522(b)(3)(B) entireties exemptions are not subject to § 522(b)(3)(A)'s domicile rule or § 522(o) and (p).

Timothy Thomas McCallan · filed 2021-05-07(b)(1), (b)(3)(A), (b)(3), (d), (b)(3)(B), (o), (p)

Despite Florida’s status as an “opt out” state, Debtor is entitled to assert a claim of exemption under 11 U.S.C. § 522(d). ... Accordingly, the Debtor is given 30 days to file an Amended Schedule C in order to assert a claim of exemption under 11 U.S.C. § 522(d) for the property described in Part II C, supra. ... These objections fail as a matter of law. ... Accordingly, Wilkins’ objections to Debtor’s entireties exemptions on the Florida Home on the grounds of §§ 522(o) and (p) are due to be overruled as a matter of law. ... Therefore, Wilkins’ objection to Debtor’s entireties exemptions based on the domiciliary requirement of § 522(b)(3)(A) is due to be overruled as a matter of law.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) permits a debtor to claim exemptions under applicable state or local law, determined by the debtor's domicile during the 730 days before filing, subject to the statutory fallback rule when domicile changed.

Todd v. Chapter 7 Trustee · filed 2021-05-24(b)(3)(A)

The applicable state law is determined by the debtor's domicile 730 days immediately preceding the date of the filing of the petition for bankruptcy.

The hanging paragraph permits a debtor to elect the § 522(d) exemptions when the domiciliary requirement would otherwise leave the debtor ineligible for any exemption; eligibility depends on whether the debtor can actually claim a state exemption.

MacKenzie v. Schreiber · filed 2021-06-04(b)(3)(A)

The Court agrees with Appellees. The plain language and purpose of the statute as well as the caselaw interpreting it support Appellees’ interpretation. ... Appellees are not “fit and proper” to claim an exemption unless they possess the assets subject to the exemption. ... The hanging paragraph is meant to ensure debtors are not barred from claiming any exemptions as a result of Section 522(b)(3)(A)’s domiciliary requirement. ... Accordingly, courts determine a debtor’s eligibility for state exemptions based on whether the debtor actually can claim the exemptions. ... A debtor’s ability to claim exemptions under Section 522(d) hinges on whether he can actually claim exemptions under state law. Therefore, the Court finds that Appellees, who cannot claim any Kansas exemptions, are “ineligible” as used in the hanging paragraph.

The hanging paragraph of § 522(b)(3) permits a debtor to elect the § 522(d) federal exemptions when § 522(b)(3)(A)'s domiciliary rule makes the debtor ineligible for all state exemptions otherwise available based on the debtor's actual circumstances and assets.

Schreiber v. MacKenzie · filed 2022-03-03(b)(3)(A)

Applied to this case, this interpretation of the hanging paragraph means that the Trustee was obligated to prove that the domiciliary requirement under subparagraph (A) does not have the effect of rendering the Schreibers ineligible for all Kansas exemptions that they would otherwise be eligible for given their actual circumstances and assets.

Section 522(f)(3) limits avoidance of a nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money security interest in tools of the trade when applicable state law permits waiver of federal exemptions and either allows unlimited state exemptions or prohibits avoidance of consensual liens.

Bruce Allen Klug and Mary Lou Klug · filed 2021-09-16(f)(3)

The Code provision is clear when it says avoidance is not permitted if state law “prohibits avoidance of a consensual lien on property otherwise eligible to be claimed as exempt property.” There is no such prohibition in the Wisconsin Statutes. Section 522 was adopted to further the “fresh start” policy of the Code and to ensure that debtors have a measure of stability as they move forward. ... The Klugs have chosen to use state exemptions, meeting subpart A of § 522(f)(3). The lack of a prohibition on lien avoidance makes clear that subpart B is not met. For these reasons, the Debtors’ motion to avoid the lien of United Bancorporation is granted.

Section 522(f)(2)(B) lets a debtor avoid a nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money security interest in tools of the trade to the extent it impairs an exemption.

Bechen v. Livestock State Bank (In Re Bechen) · filed 1981-06-19(f)(2)(B)

This Bankruptcy Court holds that Debtor’s pickup truck is a tool of his trade because its possession and use are necessary for him to carry on his trade as a farrier. ... This Court’s holding furthers the philosophy behind 11 U.S.C. § 522(f) lien avoidance and S.D.C.L. 43-45-5(4) tool of the trade exemption, which is to protect the debtor’s exemptions, discharge, and fresh start.

Section 522(f)(2)(B) lets a debtor avoid a lien on an exempt tool of the trade when the lien is a nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money security interest and the item is reasonably necessary to the debtor’s trade.

In Re Graettinger · filed 1988-11-07(f)(2)(B)

Federal law determines the availability of lien avoidance under 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(2)(B). Under the LaFond court’s standard of “reasonable necessity,” Graettinger’s pick-up truck is a tool of his trade. Therefore, First Federal’s liens on Graettinger’s 1983 Nissan pick-up truck may be avoided pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(2)(B).

Section 522(f)(2)(B) lets a debtor avoid a nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money security interest in tools of the trade to the extent it impairs an exemption.

Jackson v. First National Bank of La Jara (In re Jackson) · filed 1990-06-06(f)(2)(B)

In the instant case, in the absence of the Bank’s lien, the Debtors would have been entitled to claim the chain saw, hand tools and horse trailer as exempt, at least to the extent of an aggregate of $2,000.00. The Debtors are therefore entitled to void the Bank’s lien to that extent pursuant to section 522(f)(2).

Section 522(f)(2)(A) allows a debtor to avoid a nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money security interest in tools of the debtor’s trade when it impairs an exemption to which the debtor is entitled.

Snap-On Tools, Inc. v. Freeman (In re Freeman) · filed 1992-03-23(f)(2)(A)

debtor can avoid a lien if the lien: (1) impairs an exemption to which the debtor is entitled; (2) is a non-possessory, non-purchase money security interest; and (3) applies to tools of the debtor’s trade. 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(2)(A).

Section 522(f)(2)(B) permits a debtor to avoid a nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money security interest in tools of the trade when it impairs an exemption.

In Re Neal · filed 1992-12-24(f)(2)(B)

The security interest created during the gap period on May 10, 1979 is subject to the lien avoidance provisions of § 522(f)(2)(B) and is, therefore, avoided as to the five items the Debtors claimed as exempt.

Section 522(d)(11)(E) exempts certain compensation for loss of future earnings from the bankruptcy estate, and § 522 applies in bankruptcy proceedings rather than an unrelated civil action.

Peters v. Stamps · filed 2024-03-13(d)(11)(E)

Second, Plaintiff misunderstands the purpose of 11 U.S.C. § 522. Title 11 of the United States Code contains the federal bankruptcy statues. Section 522 of Title 11 contains the rules that govern what property is exempted from the “estate” in bankruptcy. None of the provisions of the bankruptcy code relate to the factual allegations in Plaintiff’s complaint. Plaintiff merely states that under Section 522 debtors have the right to receive “payment in compensation of loss of future earnings of the debtor,” and takes that language out of context. 11 U.S.C. § 522 (d)(11)(E). Because this is not a bankruptcy action, Plaintiff’s purported claims under this section are dismissed with prejudice.

Section 522 permits exemptions under federal or applicable state law, but only the debtor may elect them, subject to the limited exception allowing a dependent to claim property when the debtor has not filed an exemption list.

Fava · filed 2026-06-12(b), (b)(1), (d), (l)

Section 522 of the Bankruptcy Code does permit the debtor to set aside, or exempt, certain property from the claims of creditors in order to facilitate the debtor’s fresh start. Section 522(d) lists categories of property that a debtor may claim as exempt (known as the “federal exemptions”), but § 522(b) provides that states may prohibit their citizens from choosing the federal exemptions (referred to as “opting out”) and instead require the use of state law exemptions. ... Courts have interpreted this language to mean that only a debtor, and not the non-debtor spouse, has the authority to elect exemptions. Because the defendant is not a debtor, she is not entitled to her own exemption in the debtor’s bankruptcy case, whether under federal or state law. ... The limited exception does not apply here because the debtor did claim an exemption in the Property. That exemption was disallowed, but the debtor did claim it. The defendant has no right to claim the debtor’s exemption again (and doing so would be futile) and unfortunately, she has no right to claim her own exemption.

Section 522(b)(2) permits a debtor to choose federal or state exemptions unless applicable state law disallows that choice, while § 522(l) makes claimed property exempt unless a party in interest objects and places the initial exemption-objection burden on the objecting party.

Genevievette Walker-Lightfoot · filed 2024-03-27(b)(2), (l)

Under section 522 of the Code, a debtor may choose between federal or state exemptions, “unless the State law that is applicable to the debtor … specifically does not so authorize.” 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2). ... Section 522(l) of the Code provides that “[u]nless a party in interest objects, the property claimed as exempt on such list is exempt.” 11 U.S.C. § 522(l). ... An objecting party must establish in the first instance that the exemption is not properly claimed by making a prima facie case that the objection should be sustained. A showing that the claimed exemption is facially invalid meets this standard. A debtor then may provide additional evidence to support the validity of the claimed exemption, which if done, leaves the ultimate burden of persuasion on the objecting party.

A debtor who repeatedly declared New York domicile under penalty of perjury could not amend that declaration to claim a Florida homestead exemption.

Salomon v. Kaiser (In Re Kaiser) · filed 1983-04-11(b)

The court finds the appellants arguments to be without merit and sees no basis upon which Mr. Kaiser is entitled to the Florida homestead exemption. Mr. Kaiser on several occasions declared, under penalty of perjury, New York to be his domicile. The bankruptcy court was correct in prohibiting Mr. Kaiser from amending his declaration of domicile.

Section 522(f)(1) permits a debtor to invoke California’s automatic homestead exemption for judicial lien avoidance in bankruptcy even when no forced sale is pending.

In Re Mulch · filed 1995-05-04(f)(1)

Applying the reasoning of these cases, the debtors have available to them the automatic homestead exemption provided in C.C.P. § 704.720 for purposes of lien avoidance under § 522(f)(1).

Section 522(f)(2)'s formula determines whether a judicial lien impairs a homestead exemption even when state law prevents foreclosure of the lien.

Coats v. Ogg (In Re Coats) · filed 1999-04-15(f)(2)

Whether a judicial hen impairs an exemption is determined by applying the formula set forth in § 522(f)(2). ... We conclude, therefore, that the judicial hen of Betty Ogg impairs the Debtor’s homestead exemption and is avoidable pursuant to § 522(f).

Section 522(b)(3)(A) permits a debtor to claim North Carolina’s homestead exemption, which covers a capped interest in a residence rather than the residence’s entire value.

Christine M Sugar · filed 2024-03-28(b)(3)(A)

Appellant argues that the homestead exemption extends to cover the entirety of the value of her home. The court disagrees. ... When a debtor files a petition under Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code, all her assets become property of the bankruptcy estate, see § 541(a), save for certain interests that she may reclaim as exempt. See § 522(c); § 522(b)(3)(A).

Section 522(b)(3)(A) fixes the validity of a claimed exemption as of the date the bankruptcy petition is filed.

Larry Dean Schoneboom · filed 2024-11-18(b)(3)(A)

The validity of a claimed exemption is determined as of the date of filing the petition. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3)(A).

Payment of an allowed homestead exemption may be deferred for a reasonable time while the trustee performs administrative duties, depending on the circumstances of the case.

Greene v. Balaber-Strauss · filed 1987-08-07

Given the bankruptcy judge’s intimate familiarity with the case, that court will generally be in the best position to weigh the competing values under a reasonableness test and is in the best position to determine what time is reasonable. ... Under the circumstances, the decision to withhold the exemptions can be deemed reasonable, and the Greenes’ appeal is denied.

Section 522(b)(3)(B) measures an entireties exemption at the commencement of the bankruptcy case, so a later agreement concerning the property does not change the exemption.

Radiance Capital v. Crow · filed 2021-02-12(b)(3)(B)

And the language of § 522(b)(3)(B) refers to “interests of the debtor in property as of the commencement of the case.” Any subsequent agreement concerning the Fidelity account therefore has no bearing on the status of the exemption.

Section 522(q)(1)(A) limits the homestead exemption when a debtor's felony demonstrates that the bankruptcy filing was an abuse, while § 522(q)(1)(B) concerns debts arising from criminal acts, intentional torts, or willful or reckless misconduct causing serious physical injury or death; the court applied these provisions to find they were not implicated here.

Jon Raiford · filed 2024-12-05(q)(1)(A) and (q)(1)(B)

Under § 1328(h), the Court must first determine if “§ 522(q)(1) may be applicable to the debtor.” 11 U.S.C. § 1328(h). “In sum, subsection (q) limits the amount a debtor may exempt for his or her homestead if the debtor has been convicted of a felony demonstrating that the filing for bankruptcy was an abuse of the provisions of Title 11.” Prince v. Am. Bank of Texas, No. 4:11-CV-657, 2012 WL 3916481, at *4 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 7, 2012). Here, Debtor’s Schedules show Debtor’s claimed exemptions do not exceed the statutory threshold. (See Doc. 18). Thus, § 522(q)(1) is not applicable to Debtor.

Section 522(p)(1) caps the homestead exemption for an interest acquired within 1,215 days before bankruptcy, and § 522(p)(2)(B) does not exempt an increased interest created by transferring an ex-spouse’s share of the same residence.

Christopher Guy Lyster · filed 2024-12-12(p)(1), (p)(2)(B)

Thus, the Court concludes that Debtor’s contention that he is entitled to the § 522(p)(2)(B) exception to § 522(p)(1) is not persuasive and lacks merit. ... For all of the foregoing reasons and based on the Court’s review and careful consideration of the Homestead Objection, Debtor’s Response, Debtor’s Brief, Creditor’s Reply, testimony of Debtor, exhibits admitted into evidence, and the arguments of counsel, the Court finds and concludes that Creditor’s Homestead Objection is SUSTAINED, in part, solely to the extent that the value of Ms. Cooper’s 50% community property interest in the Meadow Hill Property that Debtor acquired within 1215-days of the Petition Date exceeds $189,050.

Section 522(c) generally protects exempt property from liability for prepetition debts, allowing only the statute’s specified exceptions; § 506(c) is not one of them.

Alexander H. Hyatt · filed 2025-03-26(c)

These arguments must be rejected because expenses recoverable under § 506 are not included in the list of exceptions provided by § 522, and § 522(k) only creates an exception for certain administrative expenses.

Section 522(c) preempts state-law limitations that would make exempt property available for certain prepetition debts in bankruptcy.

Brian Harold Fallon and Paula Marie Fallon · filed 2025-03-31(c)

While Massachusetts law limits the claim of homestead as against certain claims, such as fraud, ... see Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 188, § 3(b), federal bankruptcy law does not recognize such limitations.

Section 522(c)(2) does not let a debtor receive payment of an exemption ahead of secured creditors; the exemption may protect real property from liquidation to pay unsecured creditors.

Jon Michael Hayes Shibley · filed 2025-06-10(c)(2)

But Debtor misunderstands the nature of the bankruptcy exemption. A debtor’s exemption can protect a debtor from having his real property liquidated to pay unsecured creditors but it does not allow a debtor to obtain payment of an exemption ahead of secured creditors. 11 U.S.C. § 522(c)(2). Accordingly, the Bank had the right to receive payment of its full debt before Debtor received anything.

Section 522(o) reduces a homestead exemption to the extent nonexempt property was converted into the homestead within ten years before filing with intent to hinder, delay, or defraud a creditor.

Niswonger · filed 2026-04-15(o)

Put simply, to reduce the value of a debtor’s homestead under § 522(o), a creditor must show that: (1) the debtor disposed of property within ten years before filing; (2) this property was nonexempt; (3) the proceeds were used to buy, improve, or pay down debt on a homestead (or a dependent’s residence); and (4) the debtor acted with intent to hinder, delay, or defraud a creditor.

Section 522(o) permits a court to consider badges of fraud as circumstantial evidence of intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors when reducing a homestead exemption.

Kessler v. Travelers Property Casualty Company of America · filed 2026-02-23(o)

Badges of fraud are factors that courts may consider to identify fraudulent intent.

Section 522(o) requires reducing the homestead exemption value attributable to a debtor's fraudulent conversion of nonexempt assets, including funds used to acquire equity in a new home.

Curt Ranta v. Krigsman · filed 2025-09-03(o)

The statute does not limit its application to increases in value from mortgage paydowns or improvements to an existing home. Rather, it targets any transaction that converts nonexempt assets into exempt homestead value—whether through increasing equity in a new home, acquiring a new property, or otherwise.

Section 522(o)(4) reduces a homestead exemption when a debtor converts nonexempt assets into exempt property with intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors; objectors must prove that intent by a preponderance of the evidence.

In Re Cook · filed 2011-12-07(o)(4)

In the instant case, Centennial Bank and the Trustee have failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the Debtors acted with intent to hinder, delay or defraud their creditors.

Section 522(b)(1) permits a debtor to elect the federal exemptions in § 522(d) unless the domiciliary state expressly prohibits that election.

In Re Rhodes · filed 1992-11-18§ 522(b)(1)

Under Section 522(b)(1) a debtor may elect to exempt from the estate the property set forth in Section 522(d) of the Bankruptcy Code unless the law of the state in which the debtor has had a domicile for the greater portion of the 180 days preceding the filing of the bankruptcy petition expressly prohibits such an election.

Section 522(g)(1)(A) permits exemption of property recovered by a trustee when the debtor’s transfer was involuntary.

Davis v. Suderov (In Re Davis) · filed 1992-11-18§ 522(g)(1)(A)

Because of the fraud and misrepresentations which induced Mr. and Mrs. Davis to transfer their marital residence it was not a voluntary transfer within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 522(g)(1)(A).

Section 522(d)(10)(E) does not require retirement-plan payments to have begun when the petition is filed; it covers a right to receive payments under a similar plan.

In Re Yee · filed 1992-11-18§ 522(d)(10)(E)

court and, therefore, overrules the objections based upon this argument.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits an individual debtor to choose applicable state or local exemptions instead of the federal exemptions in § 522(d).

In Re Witwer · filed 1992-12-01§ 522(b)(2)(A)

The Code affords a debtor a choice to exempt either assets specified in the Code or those assets specified as exempt under a debtor’s state law. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A) (1988).

A debtor may avoid a lien under § 522(f)(1) only when it is a judicial lien that impairs an otherwise available exemption.

Koski v. Seattle First National Bank (In Re Koski) · filed 1992-12-08§ 522(f)(1)

Section 522(f)(1) applies only to judicial liens. ... A mechanic’s lien is therefore a statutory lien, and not subject to the avoidance provisions of section 522(f).

Section 522(b) lets states allow or disallow the federal exemptions, and § 522(b)(1) authorizes a debtor to choose them when state law does not prohibit their use.

In re Criswell · filed 1992-12-14§§ 522(b), 522(b)(1)

The plain language of the 11 U.S.C. § 522(b) gives states the option of allowing or disallowing the federal exemptions, without limitation. ... This election is authorized by 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(1) (1988).

Section 522(d)(11)(D) and (E) require a debtor to elect one exemption for a single personal-injury award rather than claim both.

In Re Russell · filed 1992-12-15§§ 522(d)(11)(D), 522(d)(11)(E)

This Court holds, as it held on May 19, 1992, that the debtor may not make two separate exemptions with respect to a particular personal injury judgment or settlement; the debtor must elect one exemption with regard to that personal injury award.

Under § 522(b)(2)(A), a debtor using Alabama’s exemption scheme exempts only the amount of lawsuit proceeds specifically claimed.

In Re Shoemaker · filed 1992-12-21§ 522(b)(2)(A)

It is that much, and that much only, that is exempt from property of his bankruptcy estate. All proceeds of the lawsuit above his $1,000.00 claim of exemption belong to the Trustee and may be used for the benefit of the Debtor’s creditors.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) need not be used to exempt a plan excluded from the estate under § 541(c)(2).

In Re Stephen Smith and Marcia Ann Smith · filed 1992-12-22§ 522(b)(2)(A)

Because such a plan is not included in the estate created at the commencement of a case in bankruptcy, it is unnecessary to resort to the provisions of § 522 to exempt such a plan from the resulting estate.

A post-Code rescheduling of a pre-Code lien, without a new security agreement or additional funds, is insufficient to permit avoidance under § 522(f)(2)(B).

In Re Davis · filed 1992-12-24§ 522(f)(2)(B)

This court cannot find that merely rescheduling a single debt after the enactment of the Bankruptcy Code is sufficient to allow the Debtors to avoid the pre-Code lien.

Section 522(f) permits avoidance of a judicial lien only to the extent it impairs an exemption available under § 522(b).

Jay Graffen Cass Graffen v. City of Philadelphia · filed 1992-12-28§ 522(f)

Section 522(f) provides that a debtor may avoid a judicial lien on the debtor’s interest in property to the extent that it impairs an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled under section 522(b). Here, however, even if the City’s lien impairs such an exemption it is not judicial.

Section 522(b)(2)(B) exempts a debtor’s interest in entireties property from individual creditors to the extent applicable law makes it exempt from process.

In Re Harry · filed 1992-12-31§ 522(b)(2)(B)

In Virginia, therefore, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(B), a trustee may not reach entireties property to pay a debt owed by only the debtor spouse.

Section 522(b)(2)(B) permits exemption of entireties property to the extent applicable nonbankruptcy law exempts it from process, while state opt-out law can make § 522(d) unavailable.

In Re Richardson · filed 1993-01-06§§ 522(b)(2)(B), 522(d)

Florida debtors are only permitted to exempt property under state law or federal law other than 11 U.S.C. § 522(d). Accordingly a debtor may exempt any interest in property in which he had, immediately before the commencement of the case, an interest as tenant by the entirety to the extent that such interest as an estate by the entirety is exempt from process under applicable nonbankruptcy law.

Section 522(b) permits exemptions from the bankruptcy estate, and § 522(f)(1) permits avoidance of a judicial lien that impairs an exemption.

In Re Bates · filed 1993-01-06§§ 522(b), 522(f)(1)

In addition to granting exemption rights, Section 522 of the Bankruptcy Code permits a debtor to avoid the “fixing of a lien on an interest of the debtor in property to the extent the lien impairs an exemption” which the debtor may elect.

Section 522(l) makes property exempt only to the extent of the value declared on the debtor’s schedule.

Ainslie v. Grablowsky (In Re Grablowsky) · filed 1993-01-06§ 522(l)

If the debtor is entitled to exemption by declaration, then the debtor is be bound by his declaration. In this case the debtor declared exempt $1.00 of his interest in each partnership, and that is all that has been exempted.

Section 522(b)(1) permits federal or state exemptions and allows a state to opt out of the federal exemptions in § 522(d).

In Re Corbi · filed 1993-01-07§ 522(b)(1)

Pursuant to § 522(b)(1), New York has “opted out” of the federal exemptions under § 522(d) and enacted its own exemption statutes.

Section 522(f)(1) permits avoidance of a judicial lien fixing on an exempt-property interest the debtor possessed before the lien attached.

In Re Parrish · filed 1993-01-10§ 522(f)(1)

If he did, § 522(f)(1) permits the debtor to avoid the fixing of the lien on that interest.

Section 522(f)(1) permits a debtor to avoid a judicial lien on an exempt-property interest when the debtor possessed that interest before the lien attached.

In Re Saturley · filed 1993-01-11§ 522(f)(1)

Therefore, the liens did not “fix” on her interest. Thus, her attempt to avoid those liens via § 522(f)(1) must be denied.

Section 522(f)(1) permits avoidance of a judicial lien even when the underlying debt is nondischargeable or the debtor’s discharge has been denied, if the lien impairs an exemption.

In Re Henderson · filed 1993-01-11§ 522(f)(1)

A debtor may, therefore, move to avoid a judicial lien under section 522(f) even if his discharge has been denied.

Section 522(l) gives all creditors and parties in interest standing to object to claimed exemptions.

Matter of Krizmanich · filed 1992-04-10§ 522(l)

all creditors and parties in interest automatically have standing to object to claimed exemptions.

Under § 522(f), lien avoidance does not reorder state-law lien priorities; the avoidable and surviving portions must be calculated consistently with those priorities.

Kenpak Converters, Inc. v. Patterson (In Re Patterson) · filed 1992-04-13§ 522(f)

The pertinent provisions of the bankruptcy code do not by their terms suggest or require any reordering of the priorities among lien claimants. State law provisions concerning the priority of liens should be preserved where not inconsistent with the bankruptcy code.

In a Chapter 13-to-Chapter 7 conversion, the conversion date controls the debtor’s exemptions under § 522(b)(2)(A).

In Re Bartlett · filed 1992-04-13§ 522(b)(2)(A)

The court thus adopts the date of conversion as the determinative date with respect to exemptions in a Chapter 13 to Chapter 7 conversion.

A debtor cannot avoid a divorce-related judicial lien under § 522(f)(1) when the lien and the debtor’s property interest arose simultaneously.

In Re Wells · filed 1992-04-16§ 522(f)(1)

In the case at bar, Ron Wells’ lien and the debtor’s sole and separate property interest arose simultaneously.

Section 522(f)(2)(B) permits avoidance of a nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money lien on a vehicle that is a tool of the debtor’s trade; refinancing with additional advances destroys purchase-money status.

In Re Baker · filed 1992-04-21§ 522(f)(2)(B)

The same is true here. While the original loan proceeds were used to purchase the Van, the proceeds of the second loan were used to both purchase another vehicle and to pay off the first loan. And the proceeds of the third loan were used to start a business and to pay off the second loan. Since the original obligation was refinanced, its purchase money nature was destroyed.

Refinancing destroyed the purchase-money status of Avco’s security interest, making it avoidable under § 522(f)(2)(A).

In Re Adoptante · filed 1992-04-20§ 522(f)(2)(A)

Accordingly, based upon all of the foregoing, we conclude that the purchase money security interest acquired by Avco under the August 1989 contract may be and hereby is avoided because, as classified in 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(2)(A), said interest lost its purchase money security status when the loan was refinanced on November 2, 1990.

Section 522(f)(1) permits avoidance only to the extent a judicial lien impairs the debtor’s exemption; the balance remains in place but is subordinated to protect the exemption.

In Re Prestegaard · filed 1992-04-22§ 522(f)(1)

Accordingly, the debtor may avoid UJB’s judicial lien to the extent of the $10,000.00 homestead exemption which is impaired by the lien. The balance of the lien will not be avoided, but will be subordinated to the debtor’s $10,000.00 homestead exemption under 11 U.S.C. § 510(c) so as not to interfere with such exemption.

A federal anti-alienation provision makes the debtor’s interest in the Civil Service Retirement Fund exempt under § 522(b)(2)(A).

Rimmel v. Hamilton (In re Hamilton) · filed 1992-04-22§ 522(b)(2)(A)

The effect of this provision provides a “Federal law” exemption under Section 522(b)(2)(A) which will exempt CSRS funds from the bankruptcy estate.

Under § 522(f), qualifying household goods are subject to lien avoidance, but jewelry, a watch, and cameras are not household goods.

In Re Lynch · filed 1992-04-28§ 522(f)

Based upon the evidence before it, this Court cannot find that the following items are household goods: Two (2) ruby and diamond rings, One (1) ruby and diamond necklace, One (1) watch, and Two (2) cameras. ... However, the Court has found that, in this case, the following items are household goods: One (1) AM/FM amplifier receiver, One (1) CD player, Two (2) speakers, One (1) tape deck and various tapes, CDs, and records.

After the objection period for a claimed exemption expired without objection, the property was no longer part of the bankruptcy estate for purposes of § 506(a).

In Re Doss · filed 1992-05-01§ 522(l)

This property came into the estate with the filing of the petition, but then after the expiration of the time for objections to be filed to any claimed exemptions, being thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the Meeting of Creditors, the property passed out of the estate and is vested solely in the Debtors. See Rule 4003(b), Fed.R.Bankr.P.; 11 U.S.C. § 522(1).

Section 522(b) requires Oklahoma bankruptcy courts to use Oklahoma’s state-law exemptions.

In Re Spoor-Weston, Inc. · filed 1992-05-04§ 522(b)

Bankruptcy courts in Oklahoma must use Oklahoma State law exemptions for bankruptcy purposes, 11 U.S.C. § 522(b), 31 O.S. § 1(B).

Section 522(f)(2)(A) permits avoidance of a nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money lien on exempt household furnishings, but § 522(f) does not avoid a consensual lien on a mobile home.

In re Jensen · filed 1992-05-19§ 522(f)(2)(A), § 522(f)

Because the lien on these items is not a purchase money security interest the lien may be avoided under 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(2)(A). Section 522(f)(2)(A) allows the debtor to avoid a lien on exempt property if the lien is a nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money security interest in household furnishings. ... The lien is thus not avoidable under Section 522(f).

Section 522(f)(1) permits avoidance of a judicial lien impairing an exemption, and a state opt-out limitation cannot eliminate that federal right.

In Re Moreland · filed 1992-06-10§ 522(f)(1)

The federal bankruptcy rights, contained in § 522(f), which belong to a debtor on the date the petition is filed, cannot be eliminated by a built-in state limitation, whether such elimination is by definition of the exemption, or by imposition of a time constraint.

Section 522(b)(2) permits a New York debtor domiciled in New York to use the state-law exemptions authorized by New York law.

Smith v. Affinity Group, Inc. (In re Morgan) · filed 1992-06-18§ 522(b)(2)

Under § 282 of the New York Debtor and Creditor Law an individual debtor domiciled in New York may utilize the exemptions of NYCPLR §§ 5205 and 5206 as permitted by 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2).

Section 522(b)(1) permits a state to opt out of the federal exemptions and limit debtors to state-law and non-bankruptcy federal exemptions.

In Re Smith · filed 1992-06-24§ 522(b)(1)

The Bankruptcy Code provides a set of exemptions in § 522(d) but gives the option of limiting debtors to exemptions created by their state legislatures and exemptions created by non-bankruptcy, federal law. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(1) (1988). Missouri has chosen to opt-out of the federal system of exemptions.

Under § 522(f), a lien is avoidable only when the property is exempt or would have been exempt under § 522(b); default exemption under § 522(l) is insufficient.

In Re Mohring · filed 1992-06-30§ 522(f)

This language is not ambiguous and does not permit a lien to be avoided unless there is entitlement to exemption under section 522(b). It matters not at all that the property may be exempt by virtue of section 522(1).

Section 522(f)(2) permits avoidance of a lien on personal property covered by an after-acquired-property clause when the lien attached after the debtor acquired the property interest.

Brockman v. Brockman (In Re Brockman) · filed 1992-07-01§ 522(f)(2)

Pursuant to § 522(f)(2) a lien on personal property snagged by the after-acquired property clause is avoidable.

Section 522(l) permits a dependent to assert an exemption on the debtor’s behalf, and the debtor’s wife therefore had standing to oppose the trustee’s objection.

In Re Donnelly · filed 1992-07-01§ 522(l)

This Court believes Janet Donnelly has standing to oppose the trustee’s objection to the debtor’s claim of exemption.

Section 522(d)(5) exempts only the debtor’s interest up to the statutory dollar limit, not the entire property or its rents.

In re Cicala · filed 1992-07-02§ 522(d)(5)

Instead, the statute guarantees to them the value of their interest — up to a set dollar limit— once they invoke their exemption. Thus, they cannot claim entitlement to the rents on the theory that their exemptions reach the entire property.

Section 522(b)(1) requires a New York debtor to use New York’s exemption scheme because New York opted out of the federal exemptions.

In Re Rundlett · filed 1992-07-09§ 522(b)(1)

For New York residents, such as this debtor, they must look to the state’s exemption scheme because pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(1), New York has “opted out” of the federal exemption provisions.

Under § 522(f)(2)(B), “tools of the trade” is defined by the exemption statute supplying the debtor’s exemption; a debtor using state exemptions is governed by the state definition.

In Re Nash · filed 1992-07-09§ 522(f)(2)(B)

For the foregoing reasons, this court holds that the phrase “tools of the trade” under § 522(f)(2)(B) is to be interpreted in accordance with the statute providing the exemption in bankruptcy. ... Since the Debtors elected to use state exemptions, the definition for “tools of the trade” under § 522(f)(2)(B) will be the Texas definition.

Section 522(h) allows a Chapter 7 debtor to avoid and recover an involuntary setoff that the trustee could have avoided under § 553.

In Re Centolella · filed 1992-07-10§ 522(h)

In the instant case, it is not the Trustee, but the Debtors who seek to avoid the setoff.

Section 522(d)(10)(E) requires payments to be made on account of one of the listed conditions; a debtor-controlled investment available on demand is not exempt.

In Re Moss · filed 1992-07-23§ 522(d)(10)(E)

This Court views the list set forth in this phrase as exhaustive of the conditions under which payments may be made out of an account if it is to be exempt under § 522(d)(10)(E). By negative implication an investment which the debtor has control over does not meet the requirements of this phrase and cannot be exempt.

Indiana’s entirety-property rule is a statutory exemption under § 522(b)(2)(A), while § 522(b)(2)(B) incorporates separate state-law immunity and § 522(c) protects exempt property from prepetition claims.

In the Matter of Walter N. Hunter · filed 1992-07-28§§ 522(b)(2)(A), 522(b)(2)(B), 522(c)

Moreover, the location of the subsection within the general statute governing real estate exemptions reflects a legislative intent to create an exemption to have effect under section 522(b)(2)(A). ... Section 522(c) prevents the assertion of pre-petition claims against exempted property.

Section 522(f) permits avoidance only of specified lien types, so claiming real estate as exempt does not avoid a valid consensual lien on it.

In Re Stanley · filed 1992-08-05§ 522(f)

In order to avoid a lien the property must first be exempt, and next the lien must be of a type described in such section. Therefore, even if the debtor had validly claimed the homestead as exempt, the bank’s valid lien remains enforceable.

An individual debtor may exempt entireties property under § 522(b)(2)(B) when applicable nonbankruptcy law shields it from process for that debtor’s individual debts.

In Re Pernus · filed 1992-08-14§ 522(b)(2)(B)

Under Ohio law entireties property is not subject to process for the debts of one spouse. Pursuant to Section 522(b)(2)(B), therefore, property held in an estate by the entireties is exempt property in a bankruptcy case filed by an individual spouse.

Section 522(c)(2) preserves a valid prepetition tax lien against exempt personal property.

In Re Lyons · filed 1992-08-14§ 522(c)(2)

It is well established that exempt property is not protected from the enforcement of valid liens. Section 522(c)(2) adopts the longstanding rule that the security of a creditor is preserved despite the claim of exemption by the debtor.

Section 522(f)(1) permits avoidance of a divorce-related judicial lien that fixes on a pre-existing property interest and impairs an exemption available under § 522(b).

Parrish v. McVay (In Re Parrish) · filed 1992-08-25§ 522(f)(1)

As such, the judgment lien granted to Ms. McVay in the divorce decree represents the fixing of a lien on a pre-existing interest of the Debtor in property and impairs an exemption to which he would have been entitled under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b). As such it is not immune to avoidance.

An IRA is a similar plan under § 522(d)(10)(E), and payments from it may be exempt to the extent reasonably necessary for support.

In Re Hickenbottom · filed 1992-08-31§ 522(d)(10)(E)

The Court concludes that IRAs are similar to pensions in the sense intended by the statute, that is, “Just as pensions were designed to function as a substitute for future earnings, so too were IRAs designed to function as a substitute for future earnings.” 115 B.R. at 988.

Under § 522(b)(2)(A), an opt-out state’s law governs both the substance and the procedure for claiming a state-law exemption.

In Re Haynesworth · filed 1992-09-08§ 522(b)(2)(A)

Because federal law has granted the states the right to establish exemptions, the state law should also govern how the exemptions are to be claimed.

Section 522(l) requires debtors claiming exemptions to list the exempt property on the required schedule.

In the Matter of Daniel J. Yonikus and Carolyn S. Yonikus · filed 1992-09-09§ 522(l)

However, Bankruptcy Rule 4003 and § 522(1) of the Bankruptcy Code dictates that debtors who claim exemptions must list such exempt property on the required schedule of assets.

A properly filed tax lien remains enforceable against exempt property under § 522(c)(2)(B), even without an objection to the exemption.

In Re Braddock · filed 1992-10-20§ 522(c)(2)(B)

This Court agrees that the Debtors have a valid homestead exemption. However, we reject the Debtors’ argument that Taylor stands for the proposition that the holder of a properly filed tax lien must also file an objection to a homestead exemption in order to hold the homestead liable.

Section 522(c)(2)(B) specifically preserves a properly filed tax lien against exempt property.

Braddock v. United States · filed 1992-10-20§ 522(c)(2)(B)

Such a tax lien is specifically excepted from the general rule by the language of § 522(c)(2)(B).

Section 522(b)(2)(B) allows an individual debtor to exempt entireties property only to the extent it is immune from process under applicable state law, so joint obligations defeat the exemption to that extent.

Cech v. Maloney (In Re Maloney) · filed 1992-10-30§ 522(b)(2)(B)

Debtor’s exemption will be disallowed in part and allowed in part. The exemption will be disallowed to the extent of any joint obligations owed by debtor and his wife. The exemption will be allowed to the extent that the value of debtor’s interest in the entireties property exceeds the amount of joint debts owed.

For a case converted from Chapter 13 to Chapter 7, § 522(b)(2)(A) fixes exemption eligibility at the original petition date, not the conversion date.

In Re Schoonover · filed 1992-11-05§ 522(b)(2)(A)

Based upon the plain meaning which emerges from reading § 522 and § 348(a) in conjunction, and finding no convincing ... reason to go beyond that meaning, this court finds that the debtor is entitled to the $5,000 exemption claimed in her original chapter 13 bankruptcy petition.

Property subject to an exemption under § 522(b) does not leave the bankruptcy estate automatically; the debtor must take affirmative steps to remove it from the estate.

Marks v. Benson · filed 1991-07-30§ 522(b)

If property is subject to exemption under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b), the debtor must take affirmative steps to remove it from the estate.

The § 522(d)(6) tools-of-the-trade exemption is not defeated merely because the debtor failed to list the current occupation on the bankruptcy schedules, provided the property is reasonably necessary to a bona fide trade.

In Re Page · filed 1991-07-31§ 522(d)(6)

Accordingly, we conclude that the Debt- or’s failure to list his present occupation on his bankruptcy schedules does not per se defeat his claim to a “tool of the trade” exemption in the piano. Having found that the piano is reasonably necessary to the Debtor's trade, the exemption claimed by Mr. Page is ALLOWED.

Section 522(f) permits avoidance of judicial liens impairing exemptions and certain nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money security interests in exempt personal property, but not a mortgage lien on real property.

In Re Vinard · filed 1991-08-08§ 522(f)

That section allows a debtor to avoid judicial liens that impair exemptions and certain nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money security interests in certain types of exempt personal property. The lien at issue is not a judicial lien and it is not a security interest in personal property.

Section 522(i) does not require trustee abandonment before a debtor may exempt property that the debtor is entitled by statute to exempt.

K. Dale Wissman, Sheryll Wissman v. Pittsburgh National Bank · filed 1991-08-21§ 522(i)

The unequivocal language of the statute does not require abandonment by the trustee as a prerequisite to exemption by the debtor.

Section 522(f)(1) permits avoidance of a judicial lien only to the extent that it impairs an exemption, and cannot be used when the lien does not impair an exemption.

City National Bank v. Chabot (In Re Chabot) · filed 1991-08-22§ 522(f)(1)

The Debtors may not use Section 522(f)(1) to avoid CNB’s judicial lien where the lien does not impair an exemption to which the Debtors are entitled.

Section 522(c)(2)(B) limits the debtor’s avoidance power under § 522(h) when a properly filed tax lien is involved, so exempt property remains liable for that lien.

In Re Henderson · filed 1991-09-05§ 522(c)(2)(B)

The powers granted in § 522(h) are, in turn, limited by § 522(c)(2)(B) if a tax lien is involved.

Under § 522(b)(2)(B), an objection to an exemption based on tenancy by the entirety succeeds only if a qualifying joint creditor existed when the petition was filed.

Matter of Anderson · filed 1991-09-25§ 522(b)(2)(B)

must show there is such a joint creditor of Debt- or and non-debtor at the time of filing the petition or the objection to an exemption based on tenancy by the entirety will be overruled.

If a trustee does not timely object to a claimed exemption, the property is exempt, subject to the court’s stated good-faith statutory-basis limitation.

Staats v. Harper (In Re Harper) · filed 1991-10-04§ 522(l)

Since the trustee failed to object to the claimed exemption in a timely manner — in fact, the trustee has not filed an objection to the exemption at all — the property claimed as exempt by the debtor is exempt.

Section 522(c)(1) governs which debts remain collectible from exempt property after bankruptcy, and federal law controls that question in an opt-out state.

In Re Conyers · filed 1991-07-30§ 522(c)(1)

The court is driven to the conclusion that the determination of the types of debts that remain collectible after bankruptcy from exempt property is controlled by federal rather than state law.

Section 522(f) does not permit avoidance of a security interest in an unmatured life-insurance contract because that lien category is not among the statute’s enumerated categories.

In re Thurston · filed 1991-07-30§ 522(f)

a security interest in an unmatured life insurance contract is not one of the enumerated categories under 11 U.S.C. Section 522(f) that section does not aid the Debtor.

Section 522(f) permits avoidance of only the portion of a judicial lien that actually impairs the debtor’s exemption.

In Re Rachel W. Opperman · filed 1991-08-05§ 522(f)(1)

A lien larger in amount than the exemption available to the debtor does not impair that exemption. Thus, only that part of a lien which actually interferes with the debtor’s homestead exemption may be avoided.

Section 522(f) does not permit avoidance of a divorce-decree lien that attached to the debtor’s contemporaneously acquired property interest.

Finch v. Finch (In Re Finch) · filed 1991-09-30§ 522(f)

immune from avoidance under 11 U.S.C. § 522.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) includes ERISA-qualified pension plans as property exempt under federal law.

In Re White · filed 1991-10-08§ 522(b)(2)(A)

For the reasons set forth below, the court rules that the Debtor’s ERISA-qualified pension plans are protected by ERISA § 206(d)(1) and therefore are “property that is exempt under Federal law” as that phrase is used in 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(a)(1) includes a debtor’s spouse as a dependent whether or not actually dependent; a former spouse does not qualify as a spouse after divorce.

In Re Jordan · filed 1981-10-15(a)(1)

Specifically, § 522(a) defines “dependent” to include “the debtor’s spouse, whether or not actually dependent.” Since the final decree of divorce was entered over six months prior to the debtor’s voluntary petition in bankruptcy, it is obvious that he does not qualify under 11 U.S.C. § 522(a).

Section 522(a)’s definition of “dependent” includes a debtor’s spouse but is not limited to spouses, even when a state has opted out of the federal exemptions.

In Re Washington · filed 1981-10-27(a)(1)

Although the Commonwealth, in the exercise of its authority granted in 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(1), did enact legislation on April 9, 1980, denying to its citizens the benefits delineated in subsection (d) of 11 U.S.C. § 522, nevertheless, all other provisions contained therein continue to be applicable. Specifically, § 522(a) defines “dependent” to include “the debtor’s spouse, whether or not actually dependent.” As the word “include” is not limiting, 11 U.S.C. § 102(3), and in furtherance of the legislative intent of providing a fresh start, we must delve further into other possible applications.

Section 522(g) does not prevent a debtor from exempting property when state law makes the purported transfer unenforceable between the parties.

Kane v. Thorp Consumer Discount Co. (In Re Kane) · filed 1982-03-15(g)

As this court indicated in Berry, if a state statute renders the purported transfer unenforceable between the parties, § 522(g) does not preclude the debtor from retaining and exempting the interest purportedly transferred in violation of the statute.

Section 522(d)(7) completely exempts an unmatured life insurance contract owned by the debtor, while § 522(d)(11)(C) exempts life insurance payments only to the extent reasonably necessary for support.

Cyrak v. Poynor · filed 1987-11-25(d)(7), (d)(11)(C)

When §§ 541(a)(5)(C), 522(d)(7), and 522(d)(ll)(C) are read together, it is clear that § 541(a)(5)(C) sweeps back into the estate life insurance payments acquired within 180 days post-petition. Section 522(d)(ll)(C) exempts these payments to the extent reasonably necessary for support. Section 522(d)(7) does not apply to such payments; it exempts only unmatured life insurance contracts qua contracts.

Section 522(l) does not make undeclared life insurance proceeds exempt merely because the debtor claimed the policy as exempt at a lower, ascertainable value.

In Re Florida · filed 2001-09-25(l)

First, in the instant case Debtor Wife did not declare the insurance proceeds as exempt. Second, Debtor Wife received $101,222.30 in proceeds, an amount greater than the $8,000.00 value of the policy declared as exempt. Third, the value of the insurance proceeds was reasonably determinable, as the terms in the policy valued the proceeds at $100,000.00. Thus, Debtor’s exemption of an insurance policy valued at $8,000.00 does not conclusively establish Debtor Wife is entitled to an additional, undeclared exemption for insurance proceeds valued at $101,222.30.

Section 522(b)(1) permits a debtor claiming the federal exemptions to protect accumulated Social Security benefits without separately claiming them as exempt.

Combustion Federal Credit Union v. Barron (In Re Barron) · filed 1988-03-09(b)(1)

A debtor, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 407(b), is not required to claim as an exemption from property of the estate social security-disability benefits received before the filing of a bankruptcy petition if said debtor is claiming exemptions from the property of the estate provided by 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(1). A debtor claiming exemptions under this section is not required to turn over accumulated social security benefits to the trustee in bankruptcy; however, the debtor may, if desired, fund a chapter 13 plan through the receipt and use of social security benefits.

Section 522 makes exemptions optional and personal to the debtor, including the choice to exempt qualifying social security benefits.

In Re Buren · filed 1980-03-28(b), (b)(2)(A), (d)(10)

Though the debtor herein may well be able to exempt his future social security benefits under § 522, the provisions of the section are permissive and the debtor has elected to submit his future social security benefits to the Chapter 13 Trustee for distribution to creditors. The exemption provisions of § 522 are personal to the debtor. Nothing in the Code would appear to permit the Social Security Administration to exercise an exemption on behalf of the debtor.

Section 522 lets a debtor rely on state exemption laws instead of the federal exemptions in § 522(d), but that choice does not override ERISA preemption.

Penick v. Hirsch (In Re Hirsch) · filed 1988-12-12

The mere fact that 11 U.S.C. § 522 of the Bankruptcy Code authorizes a debtor to rely on state exemption laws rather than the federal exemption laws set forth in § 522(d), does not override the underlying pre-emptive nature of ERISA as to all state laws which relate to an ERISA benefit plan.

Section 522(b)(2)(B) allows a debtor to exempt jointly owned property that is not subject to judicial sale under applicable state law.

In re Oswald · filed 1989-08-09(b)(2)(B)

The trustee may sell both the debtor's interest and Sylvia Oswald's interest in the jointly owned real estate only if: (1) the property is not excludable from the bankruptcy estate pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sec. 522; and (2) the four statutory elements of 11 U.S.C. Sec. 363(h) are satisfied. Jointly owned property which is not subject to judicial sale under state law, for example, is excludable from the bankruptcy estate and therefore cannot be sold by the bankruptcy trustee. See 11 U.S.C. Sec. 522(b)(2)(B).

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

Gaughan v. Cavan (In Re Strasser) · filed 2004-01-13(g)(1)(A)

Finally, even if the funds were exemptible under state law, which they are not, the exemption is lost by application of the bankruptcy code, due to debtor’s voluntary transfer of the proceeds. 11 U.S.C. § 522(g)(1)(A), Trujillo, 215 B.R. at 204-05, Mason v. Young (In re Young), 238 B.R. 112, 115-16 (6th Cir. BAP 1999) (Wife, who received property through a fraudulent conveyance from husband, cannot subsequently exempt the property from a bankruptcy estate after trustee avoids the transfer).

Section 522(g)(1) bars a debtor from claiming an exemption in property that the debtor voluntarily transferred and that was recovered for the estate.

Carpenter v. Valley Wholesale Building Products of Rhode Island, Inc. (In Re Carpenter) · filed 1986-01-17(g)(1)

Because the debtor’s interest in the subject property was voluntarily transferred by him to his wife (and clearly with the intent to put it beyond the reach of creditors), § 522(g)(1) bars the debtor from claiming an exemption in such property.

Section 522(d)(5) permits a debtor to exempt qualifying property, so exempted property is not used to repay creditors.

New Jersey Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection v. Fornaro (In Re Fornaro) · filed 2009-03-12(d)(5)

Exempted property is not used to repay creditors. 11 U.S.C. § 522(d)(5).

Section 522(b)(1) permits a debtor to exempt garnished wages under applicable exemption law when the debtor retains an interest in them at filing and they become property of the estate.

In Re Williams · filed 2011-09-22(b)(1)

Under section 522(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code, “an individual debtor may exempt from property of the estate the property listed ...” 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(1). ... The Creditor’s objection to the Debtor’s exemption of the funds must be overruled.

Section 522(d) does not allow a debtor to retain an entire $500,000 claim as exempt property.

Auday v. Wet Seal Retail, Inc. · filed 2012-10-25(d)

Auday’s claim also does not amount to exempt property that could pass to her through bankruptcy. She did not list the claim among the exemptions in her petition. Even if she had, a $500,000 claim is too large for a debtor to retain. See 11 U.S.C. § 522(d); Tenn. Code Ann. § 26-2-103 (limiting the value of exempt property to $10,000).

Section 522 governs bankruptcy exemptions without the one-year limitation applicable to fraudulent transfer actions under Section 548.

In Re Coplan · filed 1993-06-30

This matter, however, is not a fraudulent conveyance action, and Section 548 does not therefore apply. Instead, this matter is being decided on the basis of Section 522; in that section of the Bankruptcy Code, there are no strictures in regards to time as there are in Section 548.

Section 522(c) preempts a state homestead limit that gives preexisting liens protection beyond the section’s listed exceptions.

In Re Betz · filed 2002-02-15(c)

Section 522(c) nowhere provides that preexisting debts or liens receive special protection under the Code. Accordingly, Section 3’s subordinating clause conflicts with § 522(c) and has no effect in this bankruptcy proceeding.

Section 522(d) limits the amount a debtor may exempt under the federal exemptions, including the wildcard exemption and any unused homestead exemption.

In Re Young · filed 2003-08-28(d)

Even were the Debtor to revert back to the Federal exemptions abandoned by his April 19, 2002 amendment to schedules, the $40,000 portion of the property claimed as exempt would exceed any amount which the Debtor might claim as exempt under 11 U.S.C. § 522(d) [e.g. § 522(d)(5) together with the unapplied portion to which he might be entitled under § 522(d)(1)].

Section 522(f)(2)(B) permits avoidance of a lien on exempt tools or implements only to the extent it impairs exempt property, subject to the applicable exemption limit.

Yparrea v. Roswell Production Credit Ass'n (In Re Yparrea) · filed 1981-10-26(f)(2)(B)

Section 522(f)(2)(B) allows the avoidance of liens upon tools-of-the-trade or implements to the extent that they impair exempt property, while § 522(d)(6) grants a tools-of-the-trade or implements exemption to an amount of $750.00. The effect, then, is to impose a limit of $750.00 on any implements or tools-of-the-trade lien which may be avoided under 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(2)(B) (1978). ... Suffice it to say that farm machinery of this physical size and value is not contemplated by the Code to be exempt in its entirety nor may a lien against such machinery be avoided to the extent of a statutory dollar amount.

Section 522(f)(2)(B) lets a debtor avoid a lien on tools or implements of the debtor’s trade, including large farm equipment, when it impairs an exemption.

Production Credit Ass'n of St. Cloud v. LaFond · filed 1985-07-08(f)(2)(B)

Allowing avoidance of liens on large farm implements does not impair the Act’s attempt to balance the interests of debtors with those of creditors. To the contrary, this interpretation of § 522(f)(2)(B) fulfills not only the literal interpretation of the Act, but it also enables the debtor to start afresh, without treating creditors unfairly.

Section 522(f)(2)(B) lets a debtor avoid a nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money security interest in tools of the trade to the extent it impairs an exemption available under section 522(b), including aggregated exemptions under section 522(d)(5) and (d)(6).

Peter C. Augustine and Nancy L. Augustine v. United States of America, United States Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Administration · filed 1982-04-15(f)(2)(B)

It is not the function of this court to question why Congress chose to permit debtors to avoid the particular liens enumerated in Subsection (f). We must assume that Congress understood that the language of that subsection — that the debtor may avoid a lien on property “to the extent that such lien impairs an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled under subsection (b) of this section” — compels the result that Subsection (d)(5) exemptions may be applied to the kinds of property subject to lien avoidance under Subsection (f). Nothing in Section 522 suggests a distinction that would prohibit aggregation for purposes of lien avoidance while permitting it for exemption purposes.

Section 522(f) permits a debtor to avoid qualifying nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money liens to the extent they impair an exemption, with the request made before discharge.

Smiley v. Associates Financial Services (In Re Smiley) · filed 1982-06-17(f)

The court concurs with the decision of the court in Adkins and determines that motions or applications filed under Local Rule 23 to avoid liens under section 522(f) must be filed prior to the granting of the debtor’s discharge.

Section 522(d)(5) lets a debtor use the unused amount of the § 522(d)(1) exemption, plus $400, to exempt any property.

Hawley v. Commercial Credit Plan Consumer Credit Co. (In re Hawley) · filed 1982-08-10(d)(5)

In light of this authority we find that the debtor can exempt the $7,500.00 proceeds from the insurance policy and thus Commercial Credit’s lien on those proceeds will be avoided.

Section 522(d)(10)(E) exempts qualifying pension payments only to the extent reasonably necessary for the debtor’s or a dependent’s support, and § 522(d)(3) exempts up to $200 per item in household goods held primarily for personal, family, or household use.

Matter of Kochell · filed 1982-12-23(d)(10)(E), (d)(3)

Although the exemption provisions of 11 U.S.C. § 522 should be broadly construed in favor of the debtor, the purpose of the exemptions is to protect the fresh start of the debtor following bankruptcy, not to insure that no future misfortune could possibly lower the standard of living to which the debtor’s dependents have become accustomed. ... Thus, even under the broadest reading of the exemption, the court can not conclude that the current fund is exemptable. ... The only limitations upon the application of 11 U.S.C. § 522(d)(3) are: 1.) that the debtor’s interest may not exceed $200 in value in any particular item, and 2.) that the items are held primarily for personal, family, or household use of the debtor or a dependent of the debtor.

Section 522(7) requires an individual debtor to claim exemptions and allows a dependent to claim them if the debtor fails to do so.

Summerlin v. Summerlin (In Re Summerlin) · filed 1983-01-20(7)

11 U.S.C. § 522(7) says that an individual debtor shall claim exemptions and that failing to do so, the exemptions may be claimed by a dependent. ... The debtor then should declare and specify all of his exempt property within 10 days of this date. If the debtor does not declare and specify all of his exemptions by that date, the Plaintiff shall be permitted to claim and specify the debtor’s exemptions. Once claimed as exempt, the property is “not property of the estate” and may be pursued by the Plaintiff for her alimony claims.

Section 522(f) lets a debtor avoid qualifying liens, including liens held by the United States.

Flick v. United States Through Farmers Home Admin. · filed 1985-03-06(f)

We hold the government’s claim of sovereign immunity is without merit and that § 522(f) of the Bankruptcy Code can be employed to avoid liens possessed by the United States.

Section 522(i) limits a debtor’s recovery of a preferential transfer to the extent the debtor could have exempted the property.

Humphrey v. Herridge (In Re Humphrey) · filed 1993-10-15(i)

The debtors’ complaint cannot get over the first requirement of the five-part test because the debtors may only recover preferential transfers for their own benefit to the extent that the debtors could have exempted such property.