Background

• Steven and Mary Drummond filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in 2022 and claimed a homestead exemption for their 2017 motor home (a Tiffin Allegro RV), which they used as a full-time residence.
• The bankruptcy trustee objected, arguing that a motor home does not qualify as a "mobile home" under Arizona’s homestead statute, A.R.S. § 33-1101(A)(3).
• The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Arizona certified to the Arizona Supreme Court the question of whether a motor home can qualify as a "mobile home" for purposes of the homestead exemption.
• No Arizona precedent directly addressed whether a self-propelled motor home qualifies under the statute.
• The Arizona Supreme Court considered statutory interpretation and context, as well as secondary sources and interpretive canons.
• The Court's majority rejected the bankruptcy court's contrary decision in In re Irwin and analyzed the statutory term "mobile home" in detail.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• BSI Holdings, LLC v. Ariz. Dep’t of Transp., 244 Ariz. 17 (context and plain language are key in statutory interpretation)
• Premier Physicians Grp., PLLC v. Navarro, 240 Ariz. 193 (plain language governs statutory interpretation)
• Shea v. Maricopa County, 255 Ariz. 116 (plain meaning controls where a statute is unambiguous)
• Stambaugh v. Killian, 242 Ariz. 508 (statutory context and in pari materia analysis)
• Columbus Life Ins. Co. v. Wilmington Tr., N.A., 255 Ariz. 382 (plain meaning viewed in statutory context)
• In re McLauchlan, 252 Ariz. 324 (purpose of homestead exemption laws)
• Feldmeier v. Watson, 211 Ariz. 444 (substantial compliance applies to statutory obligations, not interpretation)