Camp v. Ingalls
631 F.3d 757
5th Cir.2011Background
- Camp, a debtor in Chapter 7, moved from Florida to Texas and filed bankruptcy in Texas on June 10, 2008.
- Camp elected the federal exemptions under § 522(d) in his petition.
- The Trustee objected, arguing Florida law should apply under § 522(b)(3)(A) because Camp did not reside in Texas for the entire 730-day period prior to filing.
- The bankruptcy court sustained the objection, limiting Camp to Florida exemptions if Florida law applied.
- The district court reversed, holding Camp may use the federal exemptions; the Trustee appeals.
- Florida’s opt-out statute applies only to Florida residents, not nonresidents, so Camp could still claim federal exemptions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Florida's opt-out applies to nonresidents. | Camp argues nonresidents are not restricted by Florida's opt-out. | Ingalls argues Florida opt-out governs all subject to Florida law as applicable. | Florida opt-out does not apply to nonresidents. |
| Which state's law applies under § 522(b)(3)(A) for a nonresident debtor. | Camp contends Texas law applies since he filed in Texas and lived there long enough. | Ingalls contends Florida law applies due to majority residence during the 180-day lookback period. | Florida law applies as the applicable state, but does not bar federal exemptions for nonresidents. |
| Whether Camp may elect federal exemptions despite Florida’s opt-out. | Camp maintains he may elect the federal exemptions because Florida’s opt-out is limited to residents. | Ingalls contends the opt-out could preclude federal exemptions entirely for residents, affecting Camp if applicable. | Camp may elect the federal exemptions. |
| Does the opt-out scheme affect nonresident debtors’ access to federal exemptions. | Nonresidents should not be denied federal exemptions by Florida’s opt-out. | Florida’s residency-based opt-out could be read to restrict even nonresidents under § 522(b)(2). | Nonresidents may access federal exemptions; Florida opt-out does not bar them. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Battle, 366 B.R. 635 (Bankr.W.D.Tex. 2006) (Florida opt-out not applicable to nonresidents)
- In re Schulz, 101 B.R. 301 (Bankr.N.D.Fla. 1989) (nonresidents may claim federal exemptions)
- In re Chandler, 362 B.R. 723 (Bankr.N.D.W.Va. 2007) (Georgia opt-out allows federal exemptions for nonresidents)
- In re Underwood, 342 B.R. 358 (Bankr.N.D.Fla. 2006) (Colorado opt-out does not bar nonresidents)
- In re Volk, 26 B.R. 457 (Bankr.D.S.D. 1983) (South Dakota opt-out not to bar nonresidents)
- In re Walley, 9 B.R. 55 (Bankr.S.D.Ala. 1981) (Alabama opt-out not applicable to nonresidents)