11 U.S.C. § 522

Section 522(b) requires a state-law exemption from federal bankruptcy to be declared explicitly rather than inferred from state-court opinions; Illinois had not explicitly exempted potential contingent fees.

In Re Dennis E. CARLSON, Debtor-Appellant · filed 2001-08-31(b)

Illinois has not declared potential contingent fees not to be property. Nor has it purported to exempt them from bankruptcy under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b). To prevent debilitating uncertainty regarding creditors’ rights in bankruptcy, the courts require that state exemptions from federal bankruptcy be declared explicitly rather than left to inference from judicial opinions that may seem to limit creditors’ rights.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor to claim property exempt under applicable state or local law as of the petition date, including that law’s limitations.

The Matter Of: Michael Zibman Jamie Bailey Zibman, Debtors. Michael Zibman Jamie Bailey Zibman v. Rodney D. Tow, Trustee · filed 2001-09-28(b)(2)(A)

Under the Bankruptcy Code, the commencement of a bankruptcy case creates an estate comprising all legal and equitable interests in property (including potentially exempt property) of the debtor as of that date. ... As to the state-law alternative, the Bankruptcy Code provides the exemption for ... any property that is exempt under ... State or local law that is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition at the place in which the debtor’s domicile has been located for the 180 days immediately preceding the date of the filing of the petition, or for a longer portion of such 180-day period than in any other place.... ... Any exemptions claimed, however, are determined by the facts and the law as they exist on the date of filing the bankruptcy petition.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) allows an exemption under other federal, state, or local law only when that law protects the property from creditor process or otherwise creates an exemption.

DeNadai v. Preferred Capital Markets, Inc. · filed 2001-11-13(b)(2)(A)

Property is exempt from the bankruptcy estate under section 522(b)(2)(A) if state law protects the property against all forms of judicial process. ... Therefore, the Bankruptcy Court was correct in holding that DeNadai’s ISOs are not exempt from the estate under section 522(b)(2)(A) by virtue of I.R.C. § 422(b)(5).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor to exempt property that is exempt under applicable state or local law, but it does not shield settlement cash that is not placed in a retirement plan when the state exemption covers retirement-plan assets.

Weinhoeft v. Pogge · filed 2001-12-21(b)(2)(A)

The second possible source of authority is 11 U.S.C. sec.522(b)(2)(A), which allows debtors to shelter from creditors’ claims "any property that is exempt under . . . State or local law that is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition at the place in which the debtor’s domicile has been located for the 180 days immediately preceding the date of the filing of the petition". Once again the potential state exemption is 735 ILCS sec.5/12-1006. The $40,000 did not enter a trust, so sec.541(c)(2) does not avail the Weinhoefts. Thus everything depends on sec.522(b)(2)(A) and the scope of the exemption in Illinois law. ... But cash on hand is not shielded from creditors’ claims by sec.541(c)(2), erisa, or sec.5/12-1006 in conjunction with sec.522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(2) permits an individual debtor to claim exemptions in estate property under applicable state law, and in an opt-out state the state's exemption law applies.

In Re Vigil · filed 2002-01-08(b)(2)

An individual debtor may exempt from property of the estate certain property specified under applicable state law. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2). Wyoming is an opt out state, and Wyoming exemptions are applicable to this case. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-20-109 (LexisNexis 2001).

Section 522(b)(2) permits a debtor to elect applicable state exemptions instead of the federal exemptions under § 522(b)(1).

In Re Ryan · filed 2002-09-06(b)(2)

Having elected the state exemptions of § 522(b)(2) over the federal exemptions of § 522(b)(1), Ryan is entitled to the Rhode Island Homestead Act exemption of R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-26-4.1.

Section 522(b)(2)(B)'s exemption cannot be asserted for property the debtor concealed from the trustee.

In Re Santaella · filed 2002-10-23(b)(2)(B)

concealment of an asset will bar exemption of that asset.

Section 522(b) permits a debtor to exempt property from the bankruptcy estate, with the validity of a claimed state exemption governed by applicable state law.

Lekas v. Mann (In Re Lekas) · filed 2003-03-28(b)

Certain property may initially be included as part of the bankruptcy estate, but it may be removed from the estate through the exemption process. Section 522(b) of the Bankruptcy Code allows a debtor to exempt property from the bankruptcy estate. The validity of a claimed state exemption is controlled by the applicable state law.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits exemptions to be determined under applicable state law when the state exemption option applies.

In Re Sleeth · filed 2003-10-14(b)(2)(A)

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A), Arizona law controls the debtors’ claimed motor vehicle exemption.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) allows a debtor in an opt-out state to exempt estate property that is exempt under applicable state law or federal law other than § 522(d).

In Re Irish · filed 2003-12-03(b)(2)(A)

By virtue of 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A), Irish may exempt from property of the estate created pursuant to § 541 any property she could protect from process under Iowa law.

In an opt-out state, § 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor to claim property exempt under state law, including community-property exemptions that state law allows the debtor to assert on behalf of a non-filing spouse.

In re Perez · filed 2003-12-18(b)(2)(A)

In fact, the Code may permit a debtor to assert state law exemptions on behalf of a non-filing spouse. While only the debtor may claim the exemptions, in an opt out state the exemptions that the debt- or may claim are to “property that is exempt under ... State or local law .... ” 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A). Thus the Bankruptcy Code itself does not limit the Debt- or to claiming exemptions that would be available under state law if he were a single person. Instead, the Code permits the Debtor to claim as exempt any property that “is exempt” under state law. Thus the proper question is whether, under state law, the Debtor could claim that the property “is exempt” from community debts by asserting not only his own, but also his wife’s exemptions.

Section 522(b)(2) limits forum shopping by tying a debtor’s available state exemptions to the law applicable where the debtor’s domicile was located for the statutory lookback period.

Drenttel v. Jensen-Carter (In Re Drenttel) · filed 2004-05-10(b)(2)

The bankruptcy court stated that the Minnesota statute should be construed to prohibit extraterritorial effect in order to prevent abuse of the bankruptcy process and forum shopping. Yet, as shown, section 522(b)(2) specifically addresses forum shopping by restricting venue to domicile, defining domicile, and then requiring a debtor to claim the exemptions of the forum state.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor to claim exemptions provided by applicable federal law other than § 522(d), state law, or local law, so Iowa’s garnishment-protection statutes can supply bankruptcy exemptions.

Forker v. Irish · filed 2004-05-20(b)(2)(A)

Therefore, even though the federal garnishment protection statutes may not be available as an exemption in bankruptcy under Kokoszka and its interpreting cases, as a matter of Iowa law, and under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A), Iowa’s garnishment protection statutes are applicable to bankruptcy proceedings.

Section 522(b) makes a debtor's entitlement to claim the Florida "head of family" exemption depend on Florida law.

In re Mitchell · filed 1982-03-01(b)

The debtor’s entitlement to claim “head of family” status to exempt this property under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b) is determined by Florida law.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor to claim as exempt a federal nonbankruptcy exemption protecting benefits in a tax-qualified ERISA plan.

Barr v. Hinshaw (In Re Hinshaw) · filed 1982-09-27(b)(2)(A)

In sum, given the legislative history of ERISA and of § 522(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code, this court holds that a federal exemption for a tax-qualified ERISA plan may be successfully claimed under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) does not treat ERISA or Internal Revenue Code anti-alienation provisions as federal non-bankruptcy exemptions for ERISA-qualified plans.

Daniel v. Security Pacific National Bank · filed 1985-09-20(b)(2)(A)

we hold that the anti-alienation provisions of ERI-SA and the Internal Revenue Code do not create Federal non-bankruptcy exemptions for ERISA qualified plans under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor to exempt property only if it is exempt under applicable state and local law.

Collins v. Peyton (In Re Collins) · filed 1982-11-09(b)(2)(A)

For property to be exempt under Section 522(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code, it must be exempt under state and local law. In Virginia, to obtain the benefit of the exemption, debtors must comply with Virginia Code Sections 34-14 and 34-17.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor using the state exemption system to exempt property exempt under federal law other than § 522(d), but ERISA pension-plan benefits are not exempt under that provision.

In Re Charles W. Graham, Debtor. Edward F. Samore, Trustee v. Charles W. Graham, Trustee of the Charles W. Graham, M.D. · filed 1984-01-20(b)(2)(A)

The next issue to be decided is whether Graham is entitled to an exemption for the qualified ERISA pension plan funds under § 522(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code. That section permits a debtor utilizing a state exemption system to also exempt “any property that is exempt under Federal law, other than subsection (d) of this section.” ... While the above list was not meant to be exclusive, we find the failure of Congress to include ERISA plan benefits probative of Congressional intent that ERISA was not a “Federal law” upon which a § 522(b)(2)(A) exemption could be based. ... We thus conclude, as did the Fifth Circuit, ... that Congress did not intend to include ERISA plans within the other “Federal law” exemption of § 522.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits exemption of property made exempt by another federal statute or applicable state or local law, but a federal exemption must be expressly granted.

Gilbert v. Osburn (In Re Osburn) · filed 1986-01-06(b)(2)(A)

Defendant — Ohio Program argues that even if the funds are initially part of the bankruptcy estate, they can be exempted out under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A) as property “exempt under Federal law, other than subsection (d) of this section, or State or local law.” ... A federal exemption must be explicitly granted in the statute. ... Although the list is not exhaustive, it has been held that federal laws establishing ERISA — qualified retirement trusts actually containing provisions prohibiting assignment or alienation as a requirement for qualification (26 U.S.C. § 401(a)(13), 29 U.S.C. § 1056(d)(1)), in contrast to the situation before this court, still are not exempt under § 522(b)(2)(A). ... The reasoning dealing with ERISA applies equally to the Ohio Program enacted under 26 U.S.C. § 457. ... Accordingly, we find the Ohio Program not exempt under 11 U.S.C. § 522(a)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) lets a debtor in an opt-out state claim exemptions provided by other federal law or applicable state or local law, excluding the federal exemptions listed in § 522(d).

Hunter v. United States (In re Szabo) · filed 1986-03-25(b)(2)(A)

The provision of 11 U.S.C. Section 522(b)(2)(A) specifically authorize a debtor, who resides in a state that has opted-out, to claim an exemption in property that is made exempt under both State law and Federal law other than 11 U.S.C. Section 522(d).

Section 522(b)(2) allows a debtor to choose exemptions under the federal statutory scheme or the law of the debtor’s home state.

Small Business Administration v. Bubert (In Re Bubert) · filed 1986-04-03(b)(2)

Within the context of the bankruptcy estate, the homestead exemption acquires a special meaning distinct from its meaning in state law. The debtor’s petition for bankruptcy creates an “estate” in which is vested all of his legal and equitable interests in property. 11 U.S.C. § 541. Some of these property interests may be reclaimed by the debtor from the bankruptcy estate as “exemptions”, 11 U.S.C. § 522(b). Congress has allowed the debtor to choose whether to claim “exemptions” under the federal statutory scheme, or to choose the “exemptions” as they are granted by the laws of the debtor’s home state. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2).

Section 522(b)(2) permits a debtor to choose exemptions under state or federal law, and when the debtor chooses state law, the exemption's scope is determined solely by state law.

Haaland v. Corporate Management, Inc. · filed 1989-02-23(b)(2)

Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2), provides that a debtor may claim exemptions for property exempt under either state or federal law. When a debtor elects to claim an exemption under state law pursuant to this section, the bankruptcy court looks only to state law to determine the scope of that exemption.

Section 522(b)(2) does not treat a state-law provision barring garnishment as an exemption unless the provision actually creates an exemption.

In Re Garrity · filed 1992-08-27(b)(2)

This Court must therefore determine whether K.S.A. § 60-724(2) constitutes an exemption within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2). ... This Court agrees with the reasoning set forth in the cases cited above, and finds that while debtor’s unliquidated medical malpractice claim is not subject to garnishment pursuant to K.S.A. § 60-724(2), the claim is property of the estate and cannot be claimed as exempt.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) requires a bankruptcy court in a state that has opted out of the federal exemption scheme to apply the state exemption law applicable on the petition filing date.

In Re Morgan · filed 1993-08-12(b)(2)(A)

Since California has opted-out of the federal exemption scheme the Debtors are entitled to an exemption under “... State ... law that is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition ...” 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A) (1988). Therefore, this Court’s task is limited to deciding the amount of the Debtor’s homestead exemption according to California law applicable on the date the Debtor’s filed their petition. ... The plain language of C.C.P. § 704.965 clearly states that the homestead exemption value is determined as if the amendment to C.C.P. § 704.730 had not been enacted. Thus, as to the Creditors judgment liens, the Debtors are limited to a $45,000 homestead exemption.

Section 522(a)(2) measures exemption-property value at petition-date fair market value, and § 522(b)(2)(A) allows a debtor to claim applicable state-law exemptions in bankruptcy.

In Re Shurley · filed 1993-10-06(a)(2), (b)(2)(A)

Pursuant to the exemption provision of the Bankruptcy Code, value “means fair market value as of the date of the filing of the petition.” 11 U.S.C. § 522(a)(2) (1988); ... Under section 522(b)(2)(A), Congress has provided that state law exemptions may be claimed by a debtor in bankruptcy. ... It would be nonsensical to hold that the exemption provision of the Texas Insurance Code is preempted by the very federal statute which authorizes its application in bankruptcy court.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor to claim property exempt under applicable state law, but Illinois’s retirement-plan exemption does not shield settlement cash that never entered a retirement plan.

In the Matter Of: Donald Weinhoeft and Anita L. Weinhoeft, Debtors-Appellants · filed 2001-12-21(b)(2)(A)

But cash on hand is not shielded from creditors’ claims by § 541(c)(2), erisa, or § 5/12-1006 in conjunction with § 522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor to exempt property exempt under applicable state or non-subsection (d) federal law.

Forker v. Irish (In Re Irish) · filed 2004-05-20(b)(2)(A)

Iowa has opted out of the federal exemptions in 11 U.S.C. § 522(d). Iowa Code § 627.10. Thus, the validity of bankruptcy exemptions in Iowa stems from 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A), which provides that a debtor may exempt from property of the estate any property “that is exempt under Federal law, other than under subsection (d) of this section, or State or local law.” Thus, even if the Federal Consumer Credit Protection Act is not applicable in bankruptcy — an issue which we need not decide today — Iowa law may provide the basis for claiming an exemption based on garnishment protection statutes.

Section 522(b)(2) requires a debtor to claim the exemptions of the forum state identified by the statute's domicile and timing rules, limiting forum shopping.

Drenttel v. Jensen-Carter · filed 2004-05-10(b)(2)

restricting venue to domicile, defining domicile, and then requiring a debtor to claim the exemptions of the forum state.

Section 522(b)(2)(B) allows a debtor to exempt entireties property to the extent that the debtor's interest is exempt from process under applicable nonbankruptcy law.

Spears v. Boyd (In Re Spears) · filed 2004-08-19(b)(2)(B)

Nevertheless, it is clear that Congress in enacting section 522 of the Bankruptcy Code intended to allow debtors to take advantage of state exemptions, including entireties exemptions. This is made explicit by the use of language in section 522 that “an individual may exempt from property of the estate ... (b)(2)(B) any interest in which the debtor had ... as a tenant by the entire-ties ... to the extent that such interest as a tenant by the entireties ... is exempt from process under nonbankruptcy law.” This provision does not stutter in announcing that the Congress has expressly considered the competing interests of creditors and debtors and determined in the process to make entireties exemptions available to debtors to the same extent as permitted under state law.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) makes the exemptions provided by the law of the debtor's filing-state applicable under the federal bankruptcy scheme, without incorporating that state's choice-of-law rules.

Drenttel v. Jensen-Carter (In Re Drenttel) · filed 2005-03-31(b)(2)(A)

We are not persuaded that Congress invoked state choice-of-law rules with this provision. References to state exemption statutes do not invoke the entire law of the state. Instead, Congress used state-defined exemptions as part of a federal bankruptcy scheme, while limiting the application of state policies that impair those exemptions. ... The federal bankruptcy statute dictates the applicable exemptions, requiring the debtor to file in the designated district, and stating that the debtor is entitled to federal exemptions or the exemptions provided by the law of the state where the petition is filed. § 522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(2) does not make property exempt merely because state law limits a creditor’s use of a particular collection remedy; the property must be completely beyond creditors’ reach.

In Re Thum · filed 2005-06-28(b)(2)

Under Section 522(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, that term is intended to identify property that the state has defined as completely beyond the reach of creditors. ... For these reasons, the Court determines that 735 ILCS 5/12-803 and 740 ILCS 170/4 do not give rise to a general exemption for wages earned but not yet paid to an employee and have no relevance to the exemptions that a debtor may claim in a bankruptcy case. The Court holds that those statutes provide no basis for the claim of exemption asserted by the DEBTOR in his 2004 annual incentive bonus and the claim of exemption will be denied.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) allows a debtor to exempt property that is exempt under applicable state law as of the bankruptcy petition date.

In re Morris · filed 2006-03-13(b)(2)(A)

Section 522(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code allows a the Debtor to exempt any property that is exempt under state law as of the date of the bankruptcy petition.

Section 522(b) allows a debtor's bankruptcy exemptions to be determined under applicable state law.

In re Dougan · filed 2006-03-29(b)

In Idaho, to determine a debt- or’s bankruptcy exemptions, the Court looks to state law. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b); Idaho Code § 11-609.

Section 522(b)(2)(B) permits a generally applicable state-law exemption to be used inside bankruptcy.

In Re Basch · filed 2006-04-12(b)(2)(B)

Because this exemption statute is of general applicability and may be used either outside of bankruptcy or inside of bankruptcy by virtue of § '522(b)(2)(B), it appears to be immune from any valid constitutional challenge.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor to claim an exemption under the state or local law applicable where the debtor’s domicile was located for the required 180-day period, or for the longer portion of that period.

In Re Dicks · filed 2006-04-26(b)(2)(A)

Specifically, section 522(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that a Debtor may claim an exemption for property that is exempt under “state or local law that is applicable on the date of filing of the petition at the place in which the Debtor’s domicile has been located for the 180 days immediately preceding the date of filing of the petition, or for a longer portion of such 180-day period than in any other place....” 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(3)(A) makes the applicable exemption law the law in effect on the petition date, so a New York homestead increase effective August 30, 2005 is unavailable to debtors who filed before that date.

In Re Hayward · filed 2006-05-25(b)(3)(A)

Section 522(b)(3)(A) states, in part, that: ... (A) 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 at the place in which the debtors domicile has been located for the 180 days immediately preceding the date of the filing of the petition, or for a longer portion of such 180-day period than in any other place[.] ... As a result, the increased homestead exemption provided for under the Homestead Exemption Amendment is not available to New York debtors who filed prior to August 30, 2005.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits debtors to claim only exemptions generally available under applicable state debt-enforcement law and does not authorize states to create bankruptcy-specific exemptions.

In Re Wallace · filed 2006-08-09(b)(2)(A)

Limiting the scope of Section 522(b)(2)’s available exemptions under state law to only those exemptions that are generally permitted under that state’s debt enforcement laws eliminates the constitutional issue of impermissible delegation. ... Congress could not, nor did it, re-delegate to the states this power through its enactment of Section 522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits an opt-out state to enforce its petition-date conditions and limitations on state-law exemptions unless they conflict with the Bankruptcy Code.

Ford v. Konnoff · filed 2006-11-14(b)(2)(A)

Nothing in the Code prohibits a state from restricting its exemptions.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) makes the state or local exemption law applicable on the petition date controlling, so a later increase in the state exemption amount applies when it was effective before filing.

Rupp v. Elmasri (In Re Elmasri) · filed 2007-05-24(b)(2)(A)

Therefore, the Court finds that the $50,000 exemption was in effect as of the date of the Debtor’s petition.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) applies the state exemption law in effect on the petition date, so property exempt under that law is exempt from the bankruptcy estate.

In Re Engstrom · filed 2007-06-20(b)(2)(A)

As such, that land is exempt from the estate in this case by operation of 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A), and it is not subject to administration by the trustee via apportionment, sale, or any other means.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) determines which state's exemption law applies to a recently relocated debtor, and that federal choice-of-law rule preempts a conflicting state residency restriction; under § 522(b)(2), the state's opt-out can therefore bar the debtor from choosing § 522(d) exemptions.

In Re Camp · filed 2008-09-25(b)(2), (b)(3)(A)

The restriction in Fla. Stat. § 222.20 to non-residents is pre-empted by the federal choice of law provision of § 522(b)(3)(A), and therefore Florida’s opt-out from the exemptions provided in 11 U.S.C. § 522(d) binds the Debtor.

Section 522(b)(2) permits a debtor to choose the federal exemptions in § 522(d) unless applicable state law specifically prohibits that choice.

In Re Tinkess · filed 2008-09-26(b)(2)

Based on the language of AS 09.38.055 and my review of the legislative history, I conclude that Alaska has not opted out of the bankruptcy exemption scheme found in 11 U.S.C. § 522(d). Debtors who are residents of Alaska may take either the exemptions provided under state law or § 522(d), whichever exemption scheme is more advantageous.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) measures a debtor’s exemptions under the law in effect when the bankruptcy petition is filed.

In Re Sanford · filed 2009-03-17(b)(2)(A)

In the Ninth Circuit, the debt- or’s exemptions are determined at the date of filing.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) permits a debtor using the state-exemption option to claim property exempt under applicable state or local law, including a state-law exemption not listed in Michigan’s bankruptcy-specific exemption statute.

Shapiro v. Sassak · filed 2010-03-17(b)(3)(A)

Given the absence of express limiting language in the opening paragraph of MCL 600.5451 and the conflict which a finding of exclusivity would present with the broader mandate of 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3), and further in view of the lack of demonstrable intent in the available legislative history to radically alter the historically available exemptions that Michigan debtors have long been entitled to claim, and finally, given the directive that this Court should avoid deciding a constitutional issue if resolution can reasonably be reached by statutory interpretation, this Court concludes that Appellee, who claims exemption pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3), is also entitled to claim an exemption under MCL 500.2207 for the value of his whole life policy.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) requires use of exemptions from the state where a debtor lived longest during the preceding 180-day look-back period when the debtor was domiciled in multiple states during the prior 730 days, and it preempts conflicting state residency or domiciliary restrictions; § 522(b)(3)(B) applies the law of the situs of tenancy-by-the-entirety property and does not incorporate § 522(b)(3)(A)'s domicile formula.

In Re Garrett · filed 2010-03-31(b)(3)(A), (b)(3)(B)

For the reasons set forth below, the Court holds that (i) the Garretts (who are Texas residents) are eligible for North Carolina’s exemptions pursuant to § 522(b)(3)(A), and (ii) the Garretts are ineligible to exempt any property under § 522(b)(3)(B). Accordingly, pursuant to § 522(b)(3)(A) and North Carolina law, the Garretts may exempt $70,000.00 of value from their Texas real property. ... The Court concludes that § 522(b)(3)(A) preempts state domiciliary and residency exemption restrictions. Accordingly, the Garretts are entitled to claim North Carolina’s exemptions. ... Instead, the Court holds that the applicable nonbankruptcy law is determined by “the situs of the asset that is held by the debtor in bankruptcy as a tenant by the entireties....” ... The Gar-retts’ real property at issue is located in Texas, not North Carolina. Therefore, the Court finds that Texas law governs the Garretts’ exemption eligibility under § 522(b)(3)(B).

Section 522(b) permits a state to determine which exemptions apply in bankruptcy and prevents a trustee from using § 544's hypothetical-creditor powers to defeat a state-law exemption.

In Re Duffin · filed 2010-04-12(b)

The substance and spirit of § 522(b) precludes the Trustee from employing the fiction created by § 544 to defeat the Debtors’ claimed exemption. Congress clearly provided in § 522(b) that state law may determine the exemptions that apply in bankruptcy cases.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) permits a debtor to claim an exemption for property that is exempt under applicable state law as of the bankruptcy petition date.

In Re Purvis · filed 2010-04-13(b)(3)(A)

Purvis may claim the Property as her homestead if the Property is exempt as a homestead under applicable state law as of the date of her bankruptcy petition, June 16, 2009. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3)(A). ... Purvis satisfies the three criteria required to qualify as “head of a family” under Arkansas law based on her relationship with her brothers, Gary and Cecil, respectively. Therefore, the Court finds that Purvis is entitled to the homestead exemption under § 522 as claimed on Schedule C.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) lets a debtor exempt property that is exempt under applicable state or local law.

Baker v. Baker · filed 2010-05-14(b)(3)(A)

Under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b), debtors may exempt certain property from their bankruptcy estate. ... In this case, we focus on an exemption provided by New York law. See 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3)(A) (allowing debtor to exempt “any property that is exempt under . . . State or local law”); ... Accordingly, we here conclude only that the debtor held an interest in annuity proceeds that New York law permitted him to exempt from the bankruptcy estate.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) exempts a debtor’s homestead from the bankruptcy estate when the provision applies.

Tribeca Lending Corp. v. Real Estate Depot, Inc. · filed 2010-07-14(b)(3)(A)

However, the Thorntons’ homestead in this case was property that was exempt from the bankruptcy estate.

Section 522(b) permits a debtor to choose the federal exemptions in § 522(d) or applicable non-§ 522(d) federal and state or local exemptions, and a debtor in a state that has opted out of § 522(d) is limited to the applicable non-§ 522(d) federal and state or local exemptions.

Moon v. Hurd (In Re Hurd) · filed 2010-12-15(b)(1), (b)(2) and (b)(3)

Pursuant to § 522(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, a debtor may exempt from property of the estate: (1) property listed in Bankruptcy Code § 522(d); or (2) property which is exempt under applicable federal law other than § 522(d) and the state and local laws of the place where the debtor has been domiciled for a specified period of time. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(1). A state may opt out of the § 522(d) exemptions. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2). A debtor whose domicile is in a state that has opted out of the federal Bankruptcy Code exemptions is limited to the exemptions applicable under federal law other than § 522(d) and the laws of such state and locality. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2) and (3).

Section 522(b)(2) permits states to opt out of the federal exemptions, and § 522(b)(3) permits debtors in non-opt-out states to use qualifying state exemptions, but neither provision authorizes states to create exemptions available only to debtors in bankruptcy.

In re: Steven Schafer v. · filed 2011-02-17(b)(2) and (b)(3)

This Panel concludes that the “opt-out” language of 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2) and the language of § 522(b)(3) do not alter the requirements of the Bankruptcy Clause; that is, the states may not pass legislation which relates only to debtors in bankruptcy.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) allows a debtor to claim only property exempt from judgment collection under state law, not property exempt solely under a state bankruptcy-specific exemption law.

In Re Reinhart · filed 2011-11-16(b)(3)(A)

The question then becomes whether 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3)(A), adopted as part of the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, Pub. L. 95-598, 92 Stat. 2590, carries forward the same constrained intent and effect in allowing a debtor in bankruptcy to exempt property under state law. For two reasons, the Court concludes that Congress must have intended the same constraint and did not intend § 522(b)(3)(A) to allow debtors to claim exemptions under state bankruptcy-specific exemption laws such as MCL § 600.5451.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) permits an individual debtor to claim property exempt under applicable state or local law instead of the federal exemptions in § 522(d).

In Re Dean · filed 2012-03-20(b)(3)(A)

Under § 522(b)(1), “an individual debtor may exempt from property of the estate the property listed in either paragraph (2) or, in the alternative, paragraph (3)[.]” Paragraph (2) allows the debtor to take the federal bankruptcy exemptions listed in § 522(d) unless state law expressly prohibits it. Paragraph (3) allows the debtor to exempt “any property that is exempt under Federal law, other than [§ 522(d) ], or State or local law that is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition[.]” ... Thus, Georgia bankruptcy debtors may exempt “any property that is exempt under ... State or local law.” 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3)(A).

Section 522(b) allows a state to opt out of the federal exemption scheme and require debtors to use state or local exemptions, without limiting the state’s power to define those exemptions.

In re Westby · filed 2012-04-04(b)(2), (b)(3)(A)

Here, rather than expressly forbidding state action, Congress has invited it by deferring to state exemption schemes. Section 522 of the Bankruptcy Code expressly permits a state to “opt-out” of the federal exemptions in favor of state-law exemptions.

Section 522(b) permits a debtor in a state that has not opted out of the federal exemption system to choose between the federal exemptions in § 522(d) and applicable state or nonbankruptcy federal exemptions.

In re Hernandez · filed 2012-04-13(b)(1), (b)(2), and (d)

Currently, there is a “dual exemption scheme in Section 522, affording two exemption systems for debtors unless a state declines to permit the dual system by opting out of the federal bankruptcy exemption system”. ... If the debtor’s state has not opted-out of the federal exemption system through legislation, the debtor can choose between either the exemptions provided in Section 522(d) or the ones available under applicable state and nonbankruptcy federal law. ... Puerto Rico has not enacted legislation expressly opting-out of the federal exemption system.

Section 522(b)(2) and (b)(3)(A) allow a former resident of an opt-out state to use the federal exemptions when that state's opt-out statute restricts only residents.

Shell v. Yoon · filed 2013-09-24(b)(2), (b)(3)(A)

On this record, the statutes plainly allow Shell to take advantage of the federal exemptions.

Section 522(b)(2) permits a state to opt out of the federal exemption scheme, limiting debtors residing there to the exemptions listed in § 522(b)(3), including state-law exemptions.

In re West · filed 2014-03-26(b)(2)

If a state “opts out” of the federal exemption scheme provided in section 522(b)(2), debtors that reside in that state may no longer choose, and thus are limited to the exemptions set forth in section 522(b)(3). ... Accordingly, Illinois debtors are restricted to the exemptions in section 522(b)(3), which, in turn, include Illinois exemption statutes.

Section 522(c) does not prevent a state-law exemption with an inherent time limit from expiring during bankruptcy when the limitation does not conflict with the Bankruptcy Code.

In re Williams · filed 2014-08-06(c)

I find no express conflict between Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 188, § 11(a) and the Bankruptcy Code, and conclude that any ambiguity should be resolved with deference to state law. Therefore, a state law exemption defined by an innate temporal limitation shall expire pursuant to that limitation notwithstanding an intervening bankruptcy.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) fixes a debtor's exemption rights by the state law applicable on the bankruptcy petition date, including that law's reinvestment conditions.

In re Smith · filed 2014-08-26(b)(3)(A)

Under the so-called “snapshot” rule, bankruptcy exemptions are fixed at the time of the bankruptcy petition. ... Those exemptions must be determined in accordance with the state law “applicable on the date of filing.” 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3)(A). ... In this case, the entire state law includes a reinvestment requirement for the debtor’s share of the homestead sale proceeds.

Section 522(b)(1) directs the court to determine a debtor’s exemptions under the applicable state-law scheme, here Georgia law.

Rogers v. Freeman (In re Freeman) · filed 2015-03-06(b)(1)

Pursuant to Section 522(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code and Georgia law, O.C.G.A. § 44-13-100(a) applies to determine the Debtor’s entitlement to exemptions in this case.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) permits a debtor to exempt property protected by applicable state or local law, including a state-law homestead exemption extending to sale proceeds.

In re Kadoch · filed 2015-04-03(b)(3)(A)

“Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(b), debtors may exempt certain property from the bankruptcy estate created by the petition, ‘allowing them to retain those assets rather than divide them among their creditors.’ ” ... “Debtors may exempt ‘any property that is exempt under ... State or local law that is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition ... ’” ... Here, the Debtor is claiming a state law homestead exemption, which would extend to the proceeds of the sale of the Property. ... In sum, notwithstanding the language in the Divorce Decree that the Debtor and Ms. Kadoch were to pay Ms. Clenott’s debt from the net sale proceeds, the Divorce Decree did not elevate Ms. Clenott’s right to enforce her debt above other creditors, modify the character of her debt, or preclude the Debtor from claiming the Property exempt as his homestead, either generally or as a bar to Ms. Clenott’s enforcement of her debt.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) incorporates exemptions available under the applicable state law, including a state homestead exemption.

Grant v. United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Oklahoma · filed 2016-02-04(b)(3)(A)

Clabaugh argued on appeal that Oklahoma has opted out of the homestead exemption found in section § 522(f). This is not accurate as § 522(b)(3)(A) specifically incorporates exemptions under applicable state law, which would include Oklahoma state law.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) allows a debtor to exempt property that is exempt under applicable state or local law.

In re Foster · filed 2016-08-12(b)(3)(A)

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3)(A), "any property that is exempt under ... State or local law” is excluded from the bankruptcy estate.

Section 522(b) makes Florida's constitutional homestead exemption available in a bankruptcy case, subject to the debtor's satisfaction of Florida homestead law.

In re Martinez · filed 2019-01-07(b)

Debtor is not entitled to any claimed exemption of the Property as homestead.

Section 522(b)(3)(B) exempts a debtor’s interest held as a tenant by the entirety only to the extent that the same interest is exempt from process under applicable state law.

Williams v. Jaffe · filed 2019-08-05(b)(3)(B)

We read this provision to establish two things. First, the opening language indicates the interests that may qualify for exemptions—any interest the debtor has, so long as she holds that interest as a tenant by the entirety. The provision then defines which of those qualifying interests are exempt—all of the debtor’s qualifying interests to the extent that they are exempt under applicable nonbankruptcy law. Our reading of the statute yields a simple result—interests a debtor holds as a tenant by the entirety are exempt to the extent that those interests the debtor holds as a tenant by the entirety are exempt under state law.

Section 522(b)(3) allows a debtor who elects that exemption scheme to claim exemptions as provided by applicable state law; here, California law governed McClure’s exemptions.

Shirley Foose McClure · filed 2019-10-18(b)(3)

Ms. McClure has selected to claim exemptions under 11 USC §522(b)(3), so her exemptions are as allowed under California law for a bankruptcy case.

Sections 522(b)(2) and (b)(3)(A) apply state-law exemptions in bankruptcy according to what state law actually exempts, without requiring the state law to mention bankruptcy.

Burciaga v. Moglia · filed 2019-12-13(b)(2), (b)(3)(A)

Legislative history (and thus legislative intent) may be consulted when a statute is ambiguous, but there’s nothing ambiguous about the text that Illinois has enacted—nor is there any ambiguity in the rule of §522(b)(2) and (3)(A) that what is exempt under state law is exempt in federal bankruptcy proceedings.

Section 522(b)(2) and (3)(A) apply state-law exemptions in bankruptcy, so property exempt under state law is exempt under federal law without a state-specific bankruptcy enactment.

Burciaga v. Moglia · filed 2019-12-13(b)(2), (b)(3)(A)

Section 522(b)(2) and (3)(A), which applies state-law exemptions in bankruptcy, does not ask courts to determine what state legislators may have been thinking or hoping would happen in federal court. The federal statute instead asks what is exempt under state law. Whatever is exempt under state law is exempt under federal law too. State legislators need not know about this rule; exemption in bankruptcy happens as a result of §522, not as a result of state legislators’ plans or desires or understanding.

Section 522(b)(2) permits a debtor to choose state or federal exemptions when applicable state law does not opt out.

Timothy W. Hess · filed 2020-03-27(b)(2)

If property is part of their bankruptcy estate, New Mexico debtors may elect to claim either state or federal exemptions to exempt some of that property. See 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2).

Section 522(b)(3)(A) requires the use of the exemption law of the debtor’s specified prior domicile and deems the debtor domiciled in that state for applying those exemptions, notwithstanding inconsistent state residency restrictions.

Gregory Atherton O'Neil · filed 2020-06-19(b)(3)(A)

In the absence of such authority, the Court evaluates section 522(b) as a whole and concludes that section 522(b)(3)(A) creates a legal fiction that the Debtor was domiciled in Maryland on the petition date. ... When that examination occurs in this case, under section 522(b)(3)(A), the Debtor is deemed to be domiciled in Maryland and he is therefore eligible to claim exemptions under Md. Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 11-504(f)(1)(i)(1).

Section 522(b) permits a bankruptcy debtor to exempt property protected by applicable state law as of the petition date.

Don Frederick Shefte · filed 2021-10-07(b)

“Section 522(b)[] of the Bankruptcy Code allows [a d]ebtor to exempt from property of the estate any property exempt under state law as of the date of the bankruptcy petition.”

When a debtor claims state-law exemptions, § 522(3)(A) selects the law of the debtor’s domicile during the 730-day period before filing, or the specified 180-day fallback period.

In Re. Andrea A. Angera, Jr. · filed 2021-11-04(3)(A)

Section 522 of the Bankruptcy Code provides for a debtor to exempt certain property from the bankruptcy estate that would otherwise be available for distribution to creditors, and § 522(b) allows a debtor to choose between the federal bankruptcy exemptions listed in § 522(d) or the exemptions provided by their state of residence, unless the state has “opted out” of the federal exemption scheme. See 11 U.S.C. § 522. If a debtor chooses the option of claiming an exemption under state law, the applicable state exemption law is that of the state in which the debtor's domicile has been located for the 730 days immediately preceding the date of the filing of the petition or if the debtor's domicile has not been located in a single State for such 730-day period, the place in which the debtor's domicile was located for 180 days immediately preceding the 730-day period or for a longer portion of such 180-day period than in any other place. Id. § 522(3){A).

Section 522(b)(3)(A) requires a debtor claiming state-law exemptions to use the exemption law of the state where the debtor was domiciled during the 730 days immediately preceding the bankruptcy petition date.

Larry Russell Homes Company v. Maynor · filed 2022-02-03(b)(3)(A)

If the debtor claims exemptions under state law, the state exemption law that applies is the state in which the debtor’s domicile has been located for the 730 days immediately preceding the bankruptcy petition date.

Section 522(b)(2) allows a debtor who elects the federal exemption scheme to claim the exemptions provided by federal bankruptcy law.

Kippy Gordon Roberson · filed 2024-02-29(b)(2)

The Debtor elected the federal exemptions and, therefore, was entitled to an exemption of $22,950 in his share of the equity. 11 U.S.C. §§ 522(b)(2) & (d)(1). Thus, after payment of the mortgage ($372,000), costs of sale (approximately $28,000), and his wife’s share ($15,000), the net proceeds of sale of that property even if it was sold for $430,000 would not have exceeded the Debtor’s claimed exemption of $22,950. Therefore, the estate would not have realized any value from that property.

Section 522(b)(2) requires a debtor in an opt-out state to comply with the applicable state exemption law in effect when the bankruptcy petition is filed.

In Re Evander Frank Kane · filed 2024-08-09(b)(2)

California’s reinvestment requirement applies to Kane’s exempt proceeds. Under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2), a debtor is required to comply with the state law at the time of the bankruptcy filing.

Section 522(b) permits a debtor to elect between federal exemptions and exemptions allowed by state law and specified nonbankruptcy federal law, subject to a state's opt-out.

Jeffries v. Herr · filed 2025-01-27(b)(1), (b)(2)

Generally, a debtor may elect one of two alternative schemes of exemption: (1) the debtor may claim the specific federal exemptions listed in § 522(d), or (2) the debtor may claim “the exemptions permitted under (i) state law, (ii) general (nonbankruptcy) federal law, and (iii) § 522(b) ([3]) (B).” ... States, however, may opt out of the specific federal exemptions provided in the first alternative. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2); see, e.g., Schlossberg v. Barney, 380 F.3d 174, 178 (4th Cir. 2004). Maryland, like most states, has opted out of the specific federal exemptions, thereby restricting its debtor citizens like Appellant to the second alternative. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 11–504(g); Schlossberg, 380 F.3d at 178. A debtor in Maryland may therefore claim exemptions provided under state law, federal nonbankruptcy law, and the specific exemption provided in § 522(b)(3)(B).

Section 522(b)(3) permits a debtor to claim exemptions available under applicable state law, so state law governs the claimed exemption.

Raymond Buchhorn Grams · filed 2026-05-18(b)(3)

Section 522(b) of the Bankruptcy Code allows a debtor to exempt property from the estate under state law, so Texas law governs Grams’ claimed homestead exemption. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3).

Under § 522(b)(2), a debtor’s entitlement to a state-law exemption is determined when the bankruptcy petition is filed; later use of the property does not defeat the exemption.

In Re Harlan · filed 1983-06-23(b)(2)

Applying the principle announced in the White decision, and Texas Revised Civil Statutes Annotated, Art. 3834, to the facts of this case, the Court holds that the debtors’ homestead proceeds were exempt on the date that they filed their voluntary petition for relief in this case because their petition was filed within six months of the date of the sale of their homestead. The Court further holds that because the substantive rights of the parties were fixed on the date of the filing of the petition the proceeds must, therefore, be allowed as exempt, regardless of what use the debtors might make of the proceeds after the date of the filing of their petition.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) lets a debtor in a state that has opted out of § 522(d) claim property exempt under other federal laws.

In Re Goldberg · filed 1986-03-31(b)(2)(A)

Section 522(b)(2)(A) provides that a debtor in a state which has opted out of exemption provisions of § 522(d), such as Oklahoma, may claim property exempt under other federal laws.

Section 522(b) permits a debtor to exempt homestead property only when applicable state law authorizes the exemption.

Smith v. Dairymen, Inc. (In Re Smith) · filed 1987-05-05(b)

Under this section, Homestead property may be exempt only if state law authorizes.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) lets an individual debtor claim exemptions under applicable federal or state law, subject to a state opting out of the federal exemption scheme.

In Re Simpson · filed 1988-06-30(b)(2)(A)

11 U.S.C. Sec. 522(b)(2)(A) provides in relevant part that “Notwithstanding Section 541 of this title, an individual debtor may exempt from property of the estate ... any property that is exempt under Federal law ... or state or local law that is applicable.” Illinois has opted out of the Federal exemption scheme. Ill.Rev.Stat., Ch. 110, para. 12-1201. Thus, the Court looks to state law to determine the extent of the debtor’s exemptions.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) allows a debtor using state exemptions to exempt property exempt under federal law other than the exemptions listed in § 522(d).

Heitkamp v. Dyke (In Re Dyke) · filed 1989-04-21(b)(2)(A)

11 U.S.C. § 522(b) allows a debtor to choose either the exemptions provided for under state law or those listed in Section 522(d) of the Bankruptcy Code. If a debtor elects the state exemptions, the debtor can also exempt “any property that is exempt under federal law, other than subsection (d).” 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A). ... The Fifth Circuit in Goff clearly rejected a federal exemption for ERISA governed pension plans. ... The fact that ERISA may insulate plan benefits outside of bankruptcy did not lead the court in Goff to create an exemption within the meaning of Section 522(b)(2)(A). Whether such an exemption was intended was determined as a matter of bankruptcy law. Mackey, therefore, does not disturb the holding in Goff since its holding is necessarily limited to state law pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1144(d).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor to claim exemptions provided by other federal law or applicable state or local law, but not the federal bankruptcy exemptions listed in § 522(d).

Deposit Guaranty National Bank v. McLeod (In Re McLeod) · filed 1989-06-07(b)(2)(A)

Section 522(b)(2)(A) also allows a debtor to claim exemptions under federal law, other than the federal bankruptcy exemptions listed under § 522(d).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) does not provide a separate federal exemption for ERISA plans.

In Re Morrow · filed 1990-12-11(b)(2)(A)

Based on the weight of authority, this Court is satisfied that ERISA does not qualify as a separate federal exemption for purposes of 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) determines exemptions as of the date the bankruptcy petition is filed.

In Re Blair · filed 1991-03-20(b)(2)(A)

Exemptions are determined as of the date of filing the petition.

Section 522(b)(2) permits a debtor to exempt Keogh funds under ERISA as “other federal law.”

In Re Suarez · filed 1991-05-01(b)(2)

Secondly, the funds in the Keogh account are exempt from the bankruptcy estate as ERISA is “other federal law” within the meaning of Bankruptcy Code Section 522(b)(2).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) uses each debtor’s domicile to determine the applicable state exemption law; establishing a new domicile requires physical presence and intent to remain indefinitely.

In Re Ring · filed 1992-08-25(b)(2)(A)

Rather, Lois Ring’s domicile in Florida must be established, if at all, by her physical presence and intent to remain indefinitely in Florida. As the chronology of events indicate, Lois, simply was not physically present in Florida for the majority of the 180 days preceding her petition. She first set foot in the state on August 9, 1991, which was two days after the 91st day preceding her petition. Accordingly, Lois was not a domiciliary of Florida for the requisite time period under § 522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) applies exemptions under federal, state, or local law applicable where the debtor was domiciled for the 180 days before filing, or for the longer portion of that period.

In Re Orso · filed 1998-03-23(b)(2)(A)

Alternatively, the debtor may choose under § 522(b)(2)(A) the exemptions to which the debtor is entitled under other federal law and state or local law which is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition at the place in which the debtor’s domicile has been located for the 180 days immediately preceding the date of the filing of the petition, or for a longer portion of such 180-day period than in any other place.

Section 522(b) excludes property from the bankruptcy estate when it qualifies for an applicable exemption, including a state-law exemption.

In Re Kirby · filed 1998-06-25(b)

The Debtors’ motor coach is not exempted from their bankruptcy estate pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(b) since it does not meet the literal requirements under Florida’s homestead laws.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) lets a debtor elect exemptions available under applicable state and federal non-bankruptcy law.

Howe v. Richardson (In Re Howe) · filed 1999-03-12(b)(2)(A)

Section 522(b) affords debtors an election between those exemptions provided in § 522(d) or, alternatively, exemptions available under state and federal non-bankruptcy law. See 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(2) permits a debtor to claim applicable state law exemptions in place of federal exemptions.

In Re: Leonard L. Riendeau, Debtor, Leonard L. Riendeau, Debtor-Appellant v. John R. Canney (Chapter 7 Trustee), Trustee · filed 2003-07-09(b)(2)

Both the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court concluded that § 3170(b) applies only when trustee process has been initiated under Vermont law and may not be invoked as an independent state exemption under 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2). We affirm for the reasons stated in Chief Judge Session's opinion and order.

Section 522(b) lets a debtor claim exemptions under state law.

In re: Steven H. Stern, Debtor. David A. Gill, Chapter 7 Trustee v. Stern · filed 2003-10-07(b)

Admittedly, Grogan addressed exceptions to the discharge of debts, as provided in 11 U.S.C. § 523, and this case concerns eligibility for state law exemptions under 11 U.S.C. § 522. Nevertheless, we are persuaded that the ruling in Grogan implicitly overruled our holding in In re Love.

Section 522(b)(2) allows a debtor to exempt property under applicable state law, and § 522(l) makes claimed property exempt when no interested party timely objects.

Crider v. Misty Acres, Inc. · filed 2004-03-26(b)(2), (l)

Property may be exempted from the bankruptcy estate pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522 . Section 522(b)(2) allows for exemptions available under state law. ... If no interested party objects, the property claimed as exempt is exempt. 11 U.S.C. § 522( l ).

Section 522(b)(2) lets a debtor in an opt-out state claim exemptions available under applicable state law.

In Re Haraughty · filed 2009-04-01(b)(2)

The dispositive issue in this case is whether the Wages are exempt property, in whole or in part, under § 522(b). ... In keeping with the Indiana Constitution and the Indiana Supreme Court’s stated policies, this Court is compelled to give Indiana Code § 24-4.5-5-105 its most liberal construction and apply it as an exemption in bankruptcy. The Court, therefore, concludes that Debtors are entitled to claim an exemption in earned but unpaid wages pursuant to Indiana Code § 24-4.5-5-105.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor to claim exemptions available under applicable state or local law.

In re Lockwood · filed 1980-10-17(b)(2)(A)

Therefore, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1472, venue of this matter is properly in this court and pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A), the debtor is entitled to exemptions under the local law of the State of Texas.

Section 522(b) lets a debtor claim applicable state or federal exemptions and protects qualifying interests in tenancy by the entirety property from the bankruptcy estate.

Kosto v. Lausch (In Re Lausch) · filed 1981-12-11(b)(1), (b)(2)(A), (b)(2)(B)

Both the New Act and the Old Act provide that a debtor may claim exemptions provided by state law. The only difference between the two Acts is that the New Act establishes a list of federal exemptions and provides that the debtor may elect federal exemptions in lieu of the state exemptions. However, even the applicability of the federal exemptions is essentially governed by state law since the states have the authority under the New Act to reject the federal exemptions. Consequently, the exemption provisions under the New Act provide for essentially the same degree and type of uniformity as the corresponding provisions under the Old Act. Therefore, in light of the holding of the Supreme Court in ... it is clear that 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(1) and (b)(2)(A) are not violative of Article I, Section 8, Cl. 4 of the Constitution. ... 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(B) provides that . . . the debtor may claim as 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 nonbank-ruptcy law. ... Therefore, since the debtor and his wife were not indebted to a common creditor, the interest of the debtor in property held by the debtor and his wife as tenants by the entirety is exempt.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) allows a debtor choosing state exemptions to claim property exempt under applicable federal, state, or local law other than § 522(d).

In Re Smith · filed 1982-10-15(b)(2)(A)

The Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. 101 et seq. (Supp. IV 1980), gives Debtors a choice of claiming federal exemptions under 11 U.S.C. § 522(d) or state exemptions, 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A). If the Debtor chooses state exemptions, he or she may claim as 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 ...” Id.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) allows an individual debtor to exempt property that is exempt under applicable federal, state, or local law.

In Re Bizon · filed 1983-04-06(b)(2)(A)

This provision must be read in the light of the exemption provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and in particular 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A) that provides: ... While the debtor concedes that the funds are property of the estate and removed from the estate by way of the exemption claimed, this is not the way the Code deals with spendthrift trusts.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) does not exempt ERISA-qualified plans under its exemption for property exempt under other federal law.

Goff v. Taylor · filed 1983-06-06(b)(2)(A)

We find that Congress did not intend to include ERISA-qualified plans among those "exempt under Federal law," pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Sec. 522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) allows debtors to exempt property covered by applicable state or local law and federal law other than subsection (d).

In Re Stewart · filed 1983-07-24(b)(2)(A)

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits Utah debtors to exempt from property of the estate “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.”

Section 522(b)(1) lets a state restrict residents to state law exemptions, and § 522(b)(2)(A) requires a debtor to claim those exemptions in the manner prescribed by state law.

Cappetta v. Household Finance Co. (In Re Cappetta) · filed 1983-10-17(b)(1), (b)(2)(A)

Section 522(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code gives each state the option to restrict its residents to the exemptions permitted by the laws of that particular state. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(1). ... It is undisputed that the debtor did not file a Homestead Deed in Prince George’s County, Maryland, the location of the real property, a half interest in which the debtor has claimed as exempt. This Court considers the Fourth Circuit’s decision in Zimmerman v. Morgan, supra, to be controlling in this case. The debtor herein failed to claim his exemption in the Maryland real estate “in the manner prescribed” by Virginia law. Zimmerman v. Morgan, supra at 472. Accordingly, the exemption is invalid and the trustee’s objection to the exemption will be sustained.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) allows a debtor using state exemptions to exempt property that is exempt under federal law other than § 522(d).

Parkinson v. Bradford Trust Co. of Boston (In Re O'Brien) · filed 1985-05-01(b)(2)(A)

In summary, the Court concludes1 that the debtor’s Keogh plan was not properly exempted under Virginia state law by the recordation and filing of a homestead deed in the appropriate jurisdiction. The Court also concludes that the federal exemption of § 522(d)(10)(E) is not available to the debtor in this case, and that the trust res of an ERISA-qualified Keogh retirement plan may not be exempted under the provision of § 522(b)(2)(A) for other “Federal law”. Accordingly, the debtor’s claim of exemption under § 522 should not be allowed.

Section 522(b) allows an opt-out state’s law to govern which interests a debtor may exempt.

Garon Reeves v. IRS · filed 2013-11-20(b)

Because North Carolina is as an opt-out state with respect to the Bankruptcy Code’s uniform list of property for which a debtor can seek to exempt from the bankruptcy estate, see 11 U.S.C. § 522(b); N.C. Gen. Stat. 1C-1601(f), the ability of Debtors to exempt any interest with respect to Debtors’ Residence is governed by North Carolina law.

Section 522(b)(2) allows a debtor to claim applicable state law exemptions.

In Re Mann · filed 1986-07-25(b)(2)

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the debtors are granted the homestead exemption they have claimed pursuant to 11 U.S. C. § 522(b)(2) and § 815.20 of the Wisconsin Statutes.

Section 522(b)(2) allows a state to designate exemption categories, while the debtor chooses whether to claim an exemption.

Michigan Employment Security Commission v. Jenkins · filed 1986-07-28(b)(2)

The Court does not disagree that the State, in lieu of accepting the federal exemptions listed in section 522(d), may designate the categories of property a debtor may choose to exempt from the property of the estate. ... As Judge Howard noted, however, it is the debtor’s choice of whether to exempt his or her unemployment compensation benefits from the property of the estate.

Section 522(b)(2) allows a debtor to exempt property available under applicable state law.

Shuman v. McDonald (In Re Shuman) · filed 1987-09-30(b)(2)

We also conclude that the plans do not constitute valid spendthrift trusts excludea-ble from debtor’s estate. ... For all the foregoing reasons we affirm the trial court’s holding that the pension and profit sharing plans are not exempt property of the estate.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) allows states that opt out of the federal exemptions to create their own bankruptcy exemptions.

Matter of Nuttleman · filed 1990-08-22(b)(2)(A)

Here, as in Shaw, preemption of Nebraska’s pension exemption statute Section 25-1563.01 and Nebraska’s annuity exemption statute Section 44-371, would likewise modify and impair the Bankruptcy Code provision 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A) delegating to states the right to create their own bankruptcy exemptions and would, therefore, violate 29 U.S.C. § 1144(d) of ERISA.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) permits a debtor in an opt-out state to exempt property exempt under applicable federal, state, or local law.

Gaines v. Nelson (In Re Gaines) · filed 1990-11-06(b)(2)(A)

The former argument, as stated above, has been made moot by Graham, supra, and Goff, supra. It should fare no better in Arkansas, Texas, etc. The latter argument, however, is one uniquely tailored to Missouri’s state bankruptcy exemption statute. In the first case, ERISA has been held not to be a law that exempts property under the “federal” clause of § 522(b)(2)(A). However, in the second case, there can be little question that ERISA is a law which makes property “exempt from attachment and execution.” Accordingly, it would be made exempt by the “state” clause of § 522(b)(2)(A).

Section 522(b)(2)(A) allows a debtor to exempt property that is exempt under federal law, but ERISA does not create a federal non-bankruptcy exemption for ERISA-qualified retirement plans.

In Re Wimmer · filed 1991-07-19(b)(2)(A)

Under this section, the Bankruptcy Code allows a debtor to exempt any property which is exempt under federal law. ... However, most of the federal circuits which have considered this issue have found that ERISA does not create a federal non-bankruptcy exemption.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) allows a debtor to exempt property permitted by applicable state law, and section 522(1) makes listed property exempt absent a timely objection.

In Re Irwin Hyman Janice Hyman, Debtors. Irwin Hyman Janice Hyman v. Gary A. Plotkin, Trustee · filed 1992-06-22(b)(2)(A), (1)

Nevertheless, section 522(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code excludes from a debtor’s bankruptcy estate “any property that is exempt under ... State or local law that is applicable ... at the place in which the debtor’s domicile has been located....” Because the Hymans had been domiciled in California “for the 180 days immediately preceding the date of the filing of [their] petition,” id., section 522 entitled them to exempt from their estate any property qualifying under California’s homestead exemption statute. ... Because the trustee did not object to this listing within the time allowed by Bankruptcy Rule 4003(b), the Hymans claim that their entire homestead became exempt property by operation of law. 11 U.S.C. § 522(1) (“The debtor shall file a list of property that the debtor claims as exempt_ Unless a party in interest objects [within the time allowed by Rule 4003], the property claimed as exempt on such list is exempt.”). ... Based on this information, the Hymans did not sufficiently notify others that they were claiming their entire homestead as exempt property; their schedule only gave notice that they claimed $45,000 as exempt, which is the proper amount of their homestead allowance under sections 704.720 and 704.730.

Section 522(b)(2) requires a debtor to have a state domicile during the applicable 180-day period to claim exemptions under that state's law.

Attorney General of Quebec v. Levy (In Re Levy) · filed 1998-03-27(b)(2)

Under section 522(b), the lack of a domicile in any state within the 180-day period immediately preceding the filing of the petition is fatal to any right of exemption under the laws of the state.

Section 522(b)(2) determines the applicable state exemption law by the debtor’s domicile during the 180 days before the bankruptcy petition was filed.

In Re Koons · filed 1998-09-25(b)(2)

There is no evidence to support the contention that the debtor intended to change his domicile. Accordingly, we must conclude that the debtor was and is domiciled in Florida and entitled to take advantage of the Florida exemption statute, which includes exempting all of the IRA funds.

Section 522(b)(2)(A) requires a debtor who elects state exemptions to take the applicable state law’s time limits, even when an exemption expires after the bankruptcy filing.

In Re: Zibman · filed 2001-12-13(b)(2)(A)

The bankruptcy and district courts did not apply the entire Texas law that is applicable in the instant case. Instead, their denial of the Trustee’s objection to the exemption in the instant case, “freezing” the exemption for the proceeds simply because it was in effect at the date the petition was filed, effectively read the 6-month limitation out of the statute, and transformed an explicitly limited exemption into a permanent one. This transgresses the teaching of Myers that the entire state law applicable on the date of filing must be considered.

Section 522(b)(3)(A) does not permit debtors to exempt earned but unpaid wages under the federal wage garnishment limits in 15 U.S.C. § 1673.

Smith v. Frazier · filed 2009-07-13(b)(3)(A)

Stated simply, once the Smiths sought bankruptcy protection, the Bankruptcy Code and applicable state and federal property exemption statutes governed their rights and remedies — not the limitation on garnishment of wages contained in 15 U.S.C. § 1673. ... The Court flatly rejects the Smiths’ contention that disallowance of the requested exemption runs afoul of the plain language of § 522(b)(3)(A).

Section 522(b)(3)(A) determines which state’s exemption laws apply based on the debtor’s domicile.

Showalter v. J. Hopper · filed 2015-06-19(b)(3)(A)

Given the bankruptcy court’s finding that Showalter’s residence in California was not temporary, California’s (not Florida’s) exemption laws apply. See 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3)(A); Arrol v. Broach (In re Arrol), 170 F.3d 934, 936 (9th Cir. 1999).

Section 522(b)(2) permits a debtor to elect state exemptions, subject to the limits of the applicable state law.

Hawk v. Engelhart (In re Hawk) · filed 2016-08-29(b)(2)

This Court finds Hawk’s first challenge meritless because it ignores the fact that he had a choice and elected to proceed under Texas state bankruptcy law pursuant to § 522(b)(2), not federal law.

Section 522(b) allows debtors to use applicable state law exemptions for garnished wages recovered for the estate.

In re Ainsworth · filed 2026-01-14(b)

Since 11 U.S.C. §522(b) allows Debtors to use state law exemptions, Debtors may exempt the earned but unpaid garnished wages recovered under section 547 up to the allowed amounts under S.D.C.L. §43-45-4.

Section 522(f) violates due process when retroactively applied to nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money liens perfected before the Code’s effective date.

Woods v. Michigan National Bank-Valley (In Re Woods) · filed 1981-02-26§ 522(f)

violates the due process clause when retroactively applied to security interests perfected before the effective date of the Code.

A nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money lien created during the gap period may be avoided under section 522(f) because creditors were on notice of the enacted Code.

General Finance Corp. v. Fennell (In Re Fennell) · filed 1981-02-27§ 522(f)

I thus conclude that the lien of plaintiff herein is a voidable lien.

The Bankruptcy Reform Act applies retroactively to pre-effective-date security interests, but section 522(f)(2) cannot constitutionally be applied to completely take vested property rights acquired before enactment.

Rodrock v. Security Industrial Bank · filed 1981-03-02§ 522(f)(2)

Having concluded that Section 522(f)(2) cannot, under the Fifth Amendment, be applied to a creditor's security interest in specific property acquired prior to the enactment date of the Reform Act, we hereby affirm all judgments.

Section 522(f)(1) allows a debtor to avoid a judicial lien that impairs an allowed exemption, including a lien obtained before the Bankruptcy Code, without the court deciding the statute’s constitutionality.

Butler v. General Electric Credit Corp. (In re Butler) · filed 1980-07-28§§ 522(b), 522(f)(1)

the liens are to be avoided in their entirety.

A motor vehicle qualifies as a section 522(f)(2)(B) tool of trade only when its use is substantially connected to the debtor’s trade, such as through special adaptation or constant business use.

First Hardin National Bank v. Damron (In re Damron) · filed 1980-07-28§ 522(f)(2)(B)

An automobile should not automatically qualify for a tool-of-trade exemption.

Section 522(f) is constitutional as applied to liens vesting before the effective date of the Bankruptcy Reform Act, and qualifying liens may therefore be avoided.

Baker v. GFC Corp. (In re Baker) · filed 1980-07-31§ 522(f)

In the light of these venerable principles and authorities, this court is required to observe the presumption of constitutionality in these cases, in which unconstitutionality has not been demonstrated to be free from doubt.

When only one spouse claims a federal exemption in a California community asset, section 522(d)(5) reaches only that debtor’s aggregate interest, which cannot exceed one-half of the asset’s value.

In Re Skipwith · filed 1981-03-03§§ 522(d), 522(d)(5)

In California community property that interest cannot exceed 50% of the value of the property in question.

A debtor may substitute a section 522(d)(5) exemption for a claimed homestead exemption and exempt a cause of action that is property of the estate.

Chrystler v. Geresy (In Re Brock) · filed 1981-03-05§§ 522(d)(1), 522(d)(5)

debtor could amend his schedules to remove the Sec. 522(d)(1) exemption and substitute an exemption under Sec. 522(d)(5) being a claim against the defendant for $6,250.

For section 522(f), a refinancing that cancels the original note and creates a new security agreement creates a new lien, and the execution date of the final refinancing controls avoidability.

Clark v. Transouth Financial Corp. (In Re Clark) · filed 1981-03-05§ 522(f)

In essence, each transaction creates a new lien. For purposes of applying section 522(f) of the Bankruptcy Code, it is the date of execution of the last security agreement (i. e., the date of the final refinancing) which is controlling.

A debtor cannot use section 522(f)(2)(A) to avoid a lien on household goods sold before the petition because the debtor no longer has an interest in those goods when the case begins.

Crebithrift of America v. Auvenshine (In Re Auvenshine) · filed 1981-03-10§§ 522(b), 522(f)(2)(A)

the debtors had no right to avoid the lien on the washer and dryer under Section 522(f)(2)(A).

A debtor cannot use section 522(g) or (h) to exempt or avoid voluntary assignments of disability benefits that are neither involuntary transfers nor qualifying liens under subsection (f).

In Re Berry · filed 1981-03-11§§ 522(g), 522(h), 522(f)

These transfers to the Objectors are neither involuntary transfers, nor judicial liens, nor nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money security interests in any items enumerated in subsection (f) of Section 522 and they are, consequently, transfers which the debtor cannot avoid for the purpose of exemption.

A debtor may be denied a late amendment to an exemption schedule when the trustee relied on the original schedule, took possession of the property, and unsecured creditors’ rights have vested.

Matter of Houck · filed 1981-03-11§ 522(b), § 522(l)

the debtors did not attempt to amend their claim for exemptions until almost three months after they relinquished possession of the U. S. Savings Bonds to the trustee.

Section 522(f) does not allow a debtor to avoid a consensual lien.

In Re Trobaugh · filed 2005-09-12(f)

Clearly, the lien obtained by the Bank on the Debtors’ mobile home was a consensual lien. Debtors’ voluntarily agreed to give the Bank the lien on the mobile home in exchange for the Bank’s forbearance. There is no provision in 11 U.S.C. § 522(f) that allows a debtor to avoid a consensual lien.

Section 522(f) permits avoidance of judicial liens and certain nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money security interests, but not consensual liens.

Akers v. CitiMortgage, Inc. (In Re Akers) · filed 2010-05-03(f)

Debtors cannot rely on 11 U.S.C. § 522(f) to avoid CitiMortgage’s lien. The lien was consensual and is not a judicial lien or a non-possessory, non-purchase money security interest. Therefore, it does not fall within the parameters of § 522(f).

Section 522(f) lets a debtor avoid certain liens to the extent they impair an exemption.

Phillips v. Beneficial Finance Co. (In Re Phillips) · filed 1981-07-10(f)

This Court, therefore, finds Section 522(f) compatible with the Fifth Amendment’s due process requirement. Since each of these security agreements implicitly recognized the power of Congress to modify their terms through exercise of its bankruptcy power, this Court also holds Section 522(f) applicable to security agreements entered into before the passage of the new Bankruptcy Code, those entered into in the interim between the law’s passage and its effective date, and those entered into after the law became effective.

Section 522(f) allows a debtor to avoid a nonpurchase-money security interest in household goods, subject to the section’s limits.

Matter of Lay · filed 1981-12-14(f)

Creditor, as a result, holds a security interest in both items of personal property, but only the later is “purchase money” as defined under O.R.C. § 1309.05 and non-avoidable under 11 U.S.C. § 522(f). The collateral herein was being used to secure not only the debt representing the later purchase, but also the debt incurred earlier. Therefore, the “add on” of the prior secured transaction to the last transaction abrogates the earlier purchase money character, and hence is avoidable. 10 B.R. at 848.

Section 522(f) lets a debtor avoid a nonpurchase money security interest in exempt household goods, subject to the section's limits.

In Re Gibson · filed 1981-12-21(f)

The Court further holds the secured lien for the balance of the debt owed attached after the effective date of the Code and can be avoided by the debtor under § 522(f).

Section 522(f) lets a debtor avoid perfected judicial and certain other liens, but the liens are avoidable rather than void.

Serafini v. Union Bank & Trust Co. (In Re Serafini) · filed 1983-04-28(f)

The right of a debtor to avoid a lien under 11 U.S.C. § 522(f) has the effect of making perfected judicial and certain other liens avoidable, but not void.

Section 522(f) permits a debtor to avoid certain liens on exempt property, and the right is not lost by delay absent prejudice to the creditor.

In Re Ricks · filed 1986-07-24(f)

This Court is bound by Yazzie and, therefore, in the absence of prejudicial delay, must reopen a closed case to permit a debtor to file a § 522(f) lien avoidance action.

The reasonably-necessary limit in section 522(d)(10)(E) requires consideration of the debtor’s present and anticipated income and exempt property and protects basic needs rather than a former high-status lifestyle.

Warren v. Taff (In Re Taff) · filed 1981-03-13§ 522(d)(10)(E)

the reasonably necessary standard requires that the court take into account other income and exempt property of the debtor, present and anticipated, that the limitation provisions of the CCPA are inapplicable, and that the appropriate amount to be set aside for the debtor ought to be sufficient to sustain basic needs, not related to his former status in society or the lifestyle to which he is accustomed but taking into account the special needs that a retired and elderly debtor may claim.

Section 522(f) is unconstitutional when retroactively applied to a substantial pre-enactment security interest in household goods.

Sams v. Avco Financial Services (In Re Sams) · filed 1981-03-16§ 522(f)

Such retrospective application violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and is therefore unconstitutional.