The right of a debtor to claim an exemption is a question of law reviewed de novo. In re Elliott, 523 B.R. 188, 191 (9th Cir. BAP 2014).
A debtor's entitlement to claim an exemption from estate property is a question of law, which we review de novo. Diaz v. Kosmala (In re Diaz) , 547 B.R. 329, 333-34 (9th Cir. BAP 2016) (citing Elliott v. Weil (In re Elliott) , 523 B.R. 188, 191 (9th Cir. BAP 2014) ). The construction of state exemption laws also is reviewed de novo.
This is Mr. Elliott's third appearance before this Panel. While detailed factual background information was included in our two published Opinions in Elliott v. Weil (In re Elliott), 523 B.R. 188 (9th Cir. BAP 2014) (" Elliott I "), and Elliott v. Weil (In re Elliott), 529 B.R. 747 (9th Cir. BAP 2015) (" Elliott II "), we include some of that factual background here to provide context for the current decision. The parties have provided a limited record on appeal.
If the residency requirements are satisfied, a judgment debtor can claim a homestead exemption in the interest he or she has in the property, "regardless of whether the judgment debtor's interest is a fee, leasehold, or lesser interest." Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 704.820 Law Revision Commission Comments to 1982 Addition; see also Elliott v. Weil (In re Elliott), 523 B.R. 188, 196 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2014) ("[T]he [California] automatic homestead exemption applies to any interest in the property if the debtor satisfies the continuous residency requirement.").The parties do not dispute that [Rudy] Fuentes has satisfied these residency requirements.
"When a debtor files a bankruptcy petition, all of his assets become property of the estate and may be used to pay creditors, subject to the debtor's ability to reclaim specified property as exempt." In re Elliot, 523 B.R. 188, 192 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 2014) (citing Schwab v. Reilly, 560 U.S. 770, 774 (2010)). "Under the 'snapshot' rule, bankruptcy exemptions are fixed at the time of the bankruptcy petition."
The burden of persuasion, however, always remains with the objecting party." In re Elliott, 523 B.R. 188, 192 (9th Cir. B.A.P. 2014). A trustee or creditor may object to a debtor's proposed homestead objection pursuant to one of the reasons listed in 11 U.S.C. § 522(g).
A debtor's right to claim an exemption is a question of law we review de novo. Elliott v. Weil (In re Elliott), 523 B.R. 188, 191 (9th Cir. BAP 2014). The bankruptcy court's interpretation of state exemption laws is reviewed de novo.
" This "requires only that the judgment debtor reside in the property as his or her principal dwelling at the time the judgment creditor's lien attaches and continuously thereafter until the court determines the dwelling is a homestead." In re Elliott , 523 B.R. 188, 196 (BAP 9th Cir. 2014) (quoting Tarlesson , 184 Cal. App. 4th at 937, 109 Cal.Rptr.3d 319 ). It does not require that the debtor continuously own the property. Id.
The sole issue properly raised by Rey requires us to interpret California homestead exemption law. Though some homestead exemption appeals present both questions of fact and law, see, e.g., Bhangoo v. Engs Com. Fin. Co. (In re Bhangoo), 634 B.R. 80, 90 (9th Cir. BAP 2021), Rey's issue is a pure question of law, which we review de novo, see Elliott v. Weil (In re Elliott), 523 B.R. 188, 195-96 (9th Cir. BAP 2014). DISCUSSION
The right of a debtor to claim an exemption is a question of law we review de novo, and the bankruptcy court's findings of fact with respect to a claimed exemption, including a debtor's intent, are reviewed for clear error. Elliott v. Weil (In re Elliott) , 523 B.R. 188, 191 (9th Cir. BAP 2014) (citing Kelley v. Locke (In re Kelley) , 300 B.R. 11, 16 (9th Cir. BAP 2003) ). Factual findings are clearly erroneous if they are illogical, implausible, or without support in the record.