On this evidence, it is clear the Movant could not satisfy the requirements of § 727(d)(1). See Velde v. Omang (In re Omang), 403 B.R. 647, 653 (Bankr. D. Minn. 2009) ("Statements of values by debtors in their schedules are opinions. Valuations made in good faith are not a basis for denial of discharge simply because they turn out to be wrong."). The Movant submitted an email suggesting that the Debtor believed the Home to be worth substantially more than the amount listed in his bankruptcy schedules.
At the time Maloney completed Schedule A, it was her honest belief that her home was worth $300,000 and, therefore, Maloney did not make a false oath.See In re Omang, 403 B.R. 647, 653 (Bankr. D. Minn. 2009) (indicating that a debtor's value of property disclosed on the schedules, if made in good faith, is not a basis for denial of discharge simply because the valuation turns out to be wrong). As for the personal property that was allegedly omitted from the Schedules or was undervalued on the Schedules, the Court finds that any omissions were either due to mistake and/or inadvertence or were immaterial. Maloney testified that she prepared a list of all of the jewelry she had received from the Trust that was still in her possession when she filed her chapter 7 petition, that she gave this list to her attorney, and that he condensed it, summarized it, and used it to prepare Schedule B. Maloney testified that before filing, she had given some of the jewelry to her children and had melted down some of the other pieces to either sell or to refabricate.