469 B.R. 140
Bankr. D. Mass.2012Background
- Debtors Thomas and Linda Lawrence filed a voluntary Chapter 13 petition on May 12, 2011 to forestall foreclosure on their Groton, MA home at 72 Kemp St.
- The case was converted to Chapter 7 on June 29, 2011; on petition, they listed Groton as their address and owned a Maine condo at 3 Church St., York, Maine.
- They amended Schedule C to switch from Massachusetts exemptions to federal exemptions and claimed the Maine condo exempt under § 522(d)(1).
- Trustee objected to the § 522(d)(1) claim, arguing the Maine condo was not used as a residence on the petition date; trustee acknowledged the condo could qualify for the § 522(d)(5) wildcard exemption.
- Lawrences argued they relocated to Maine just before filing and were using the Maine condo as their residence with intent to reside there permanently, evidenced by actions just prior to filing.
- Court held that §§ 522(d)(1) is not limited to a principal residence and that the Lawrences used both the Groton home and the Maine condo as residences on the petition date; Maine condo validly exempt under § 522(d)(1).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does §522(d)(1) require residence to be a principal residence? | Lawrences: §522(d)(1) covers any residence, not only principal. | Trustee: not limited to principal; focuses on actual use on petition date. | Not limited to principal residence; any residence qualifies. |
| Which property was the debtors’ residence on the petition date when both existed? | Lawrences used the Maine condo as their residence with intent to reside permanently; moved contents there just before filing. | Trustee emphasizes Groton address on petition; Maine condo claimed as vacation/seasonal use. | On petition date, two residences existed and were used; either could be exempt under § 522(d)(1). |
| Does the use requirement in §522(d)(1) apply to ongoing use as of the petition date? | The condo was being used as a residence at the petition date. | Debtors were relocating; use described as vacation/seasonal by the trustee. | Use as a residence present at petition date satisfies §522(d)(1). |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Gandy, 327 B.R. 807 (Bankr.S.D.Tex.2005) (supports residence use requirement under §522(d)(1))
- In re Cole, 185 B.R. 95 (Bankr.D.Me.1995) (addressed 'uses as a residence' concept in exemptions)
- Dodd v. United States, 545 U.S. 353 (Sup. Ct. 2005) (statutory interpretation presumes language means what it says)
- Connecticut National Bank v. Germain, 503 U.S. 249 (Sup. Ct. 1992) (statutory interpretation reaffirmed; use of terms defined)