In Re McMurdie, 448 B.R. 826

Debtors Paul and Shanell McMurdie executed a $148,000 note in July 2006 secured by a deed of trust on 3 Syringa Drive, Garden Valley, Idaho.
The deed of trust described the property by address and stated to see a complete legal description in Exhibit A, which was never attached or recorded.
Debtors filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy on May 27, 2010; no other liens on the property and the property is not exempt.
U.S. Bank, as holder of the note, moved for relief from stay; Trustee objected, contending he could avoid the lien under §§ 544(a), 544(b) and 558.
For unresolved issues, the court resolved the motion on a stipulated factual record and oral argument.
Idaho law (Ray v. Frasure) requires an adequate property description; a mere physical street address may be insufficient.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Can trustee avoid the lien under § 544(b)?	Trustee asserts no unsecured claimant exists to invoke state-law avoidance.	U.S. Bank argues § 544(b) applies if an unsecured, allowable claim could avoid the transfer.	§ 544(b) not applicable; no unsecured creditor shown to avoid under state law.
Does § 558 allow the estate to use the debtor's statute-of-frauds defenses to defeat U.S. Bank's lien?	The defense may be used by the estate to bar enforcement of the lien.	Ray requires a sufficient property description; the deed of trust lacks such description.	§ 558 applies; the estate may invoke the debtor's statute-of-frauds defenses.
Is the Ray v. Frasure standard controlling for adequacy of property description in a deed of trust?	Ray should apply to treat the description as inadequate.	Miller is distinguishable; Ray should not apply to deeds of trust.	Ray controls; a description comprising only a physical address is inadequate for a deed of trust.
Does Ray apply with equal force to deed-of-trust conveyances as to contracts for sale?	The policy reasons apply similarly to both forms of conveyance.	The court should distinguish by transaction type and not automatically apply Ray to deeds of trust.	Ray applies equally to deeds of trust and contracts; Magnolia and related reasoning support applying Ray here.

Ray v. Frasure, 200 P.3d 1174 (Idaho 2009) (property description must adequately describe the property to satisfy the statute of frauds)
In re Miller, 260 B.R. 158 (Bankr.D.Idaho 2001) (street address in deed of trust historically deemed adequate prior to Ray)
Garner v. Bartschi, 80 P.3d 1031 (Idaho 2003) (deed descriptions must identify exact property; mere general location insufficient)
In re Ricks, 433 B.R. 806 (Bankr.D.Idaho 2010) (distinguishes contract context; Ray governs the adequacy issue here)