487 B.R. 600
1st Cir. BAP2013Background
- Gordon filed chapter 13 and scheduled a one-quarter remainder interest in Massachusetts real estate subject to a life estate held by her mother.
- She claimed the remainder exempt under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 188, § 1 (Homestead Statute).
- Trustee objected: (a) remainder holder not an “owner” under the statute; (b) Gordon did not intend to occupy as principal residence.
- Initial defense on both counts failed; court ultimately held she did not qualify as an “owner.”
- The court noted Boyle v. Weiss to conclude that under the current statute remainder interests are not “owners.”
- Gordon appeals, arguing the 2011 amendment includes life estates and beneficial interests, and she cites cases from other states in support.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Gordon qualifies as an 'owner' under the Massachusetts Homestead Statute | Gordon argues the 2011 amendment includes remainder holders | Trustee argues remainder holders are not within the statute’s enumerated owners | No; remainder not within the statute’s terms; exemption denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Boyle v. Weiss, 461 Mass. 519 (Mass. 2012) (holds remainder is not an owner under prior statute; current version does not extend to remaindermen)
- Doe v. Superintendent of Schs. of Worcester, 421 Mass. 117 (Mass. 1995) (courts cannot supply omitted statutory language)
- In re Gourdin, 431 B.R. 885 (1st Cir. BAP 2010) (predict Massachusetts rule where state law undecided)
- In re Hildebrandt, 320 B.R. 40 (1st Cir. BAP 2005) (state-law determination governs as of bankruptcy filing)
- In re Gray, 378 B.R. 728 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2007) (Mass. Homestead Statute interpreted consistently with its terms)