522(*), the other hanging paragraph
Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2014 10:39 am
Thanks Michael
Searchingthe cite to for West, I found one that is on point with my debtor's facts (except a different opt-out state with residency requirements is involved):
3702734 (Bankr.W.D.Tex.2006) (because debtor was not
resident of Florida on date of filing, debtor could not claim
Floridas exemptions, but Floridas opt-out, which was limited to
residents, did not bar debtor from claiming federal
exemptions);
Presumably 9th Circuit follows this logic.
Peter
Law Office of Peter M. Lively * Personal Financial Law Center I
11268 Washington Boulevard, Suite 203, Culver City, California 90230-4647
Telephone: (310) 391-2400* Toll Free: (800) 307-3328 * Fax: (310) 391-2462
On Friday, March 21, 2014 5:40 PM, Michael Avanesian wrote:
My standard disclaimer: I have no consumer bk experience. Please research.
If 522(b)(3)(A) makes it so that Debtor is noteligiblefor an exemption, then 522(b)(3)(*) means they have to use 522(d).
Lots of cases like this involving Florida like In re Adams 375 b.r. 532 and In re West 352 br 905. These cases combined do a good job of laying it out.
Sincerely,
Michael Avanesian
Law Offices of David A. Tilem
http://www.tilemlaw.com/
818-507-6000
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Peter M. Lively wrote:
>
>Thanks, but those resources don't address the issue.
>
>
>Does the bankruptcy code trump the state's restriction regarding residency? Or does522(*) require use of522(d) on those facts?>
>
>
>
>Peter M. Lively, J.D., M.B.A.
>Law Office of Peter M. Lively * Personal Financial Law Center I
>11268 Washington Boulevard, Suite 203, Culver City, California
90230-4647
>Telephone: (310) 391-2400* Toll Free: (800) 307-3328 * Fax: (310) 391-2462
>
>
>
>On Friday, March 21, 2014 1:38 PM, Mark J. Markus wrote:
>
>
>If I'm understanding your question correctly, see http://www.exemptionsexpress.com/Alabam ... souri.html as I think that will provide the answer.
>
>It's an issue of extraterritoriality (I just wanted to see how
fast I could type that word).
>
>
>*************************
>Mark J. Markus
>Law Office of Mark J. Markus
>Mailing Address Only:
>11684 Ventura Blvd. PMB #403
>Studio City, CA 91604-2652
>(818)509-1173 (818)509-1460 (fax)
>web: http://www.bklaw.com/
>Certified Bankruptcy Law Specialist--The State Bar of
California Board of Legal Specialization
>This Firm is a Qualified Federal Debt Relief Agency
>________________________________________________
>NOTICE: This Electronic Message contains information from the
law office of Mark J. Markus that may be privileged. The
information is intended for the use of the addressee only. If
you are not the addressee, note that any disclosure, copy,
distribution or use of the contents of this message is
prohibited.
>IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE: To ensure compliance with
requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S.
tax advice contained in this communication (or in any
attachment) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot
be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the
Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or
recommending to another party any transaction or matter
addressed in this communication.
On 3/21/2014 12:57 PM, Peter M. Lively wrote:
>
>Debtor has not resided inCalifornia for the past 730 days andState X(an opt out state where he lived for the majority of the prior 180 days) has exemptions that are expresslyonly for residents of that state.
>>
>>
>>Does 552(*)allow thedebtoruse State X's exemptions>>
>>
>>Is anyone aware of 9th Circuit authority on this issue?
>>
>>
>>
>>Peter M. Lively, J.D., M.B.A.
>>Law Office of Peter M. Lively * Personal Financial Law Center I
>>11268 Washington Boulevard, Suite 203, Culver City,
California 90230-4647
>>Telephone: (310) 391-2400* Toll Free: (800) 307-3328 * Fax: (310) 391-2462
>
>
>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
