In re Boyett

6 Citing cases

  1. In re Sapp

    Case Number 11-30468 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. Jun. 15, 2012)   Cited 3 times

    As Allen noted, O.C.G.A. §33-25-11 appears in the "life insurance" provisions of the Georgia Code, whereas, O.C.G.A. §44-13-100(b) appears in the "Statutory Exemptions" for bankruptcy purposes in the chapter entitled "Exemptions from Levy and Sale." Pursuant to O.C.G.A. §44-13-100(b), Georgia "opted out" of the federal bankruptcy exemptions and "thus a debtor who files bankruptcy while domiciled in Georgia is limited to the list of exemptions found in O.C.G.A. §44-13-100."In re Ambrose, 179 B.R. 982, 984, n. 2 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 1995); In re Boyett, 250 B.R. 822, 824 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2000). I agree with, and adopt, the reasoning set forth in Dean, Allen and Ryan and find the Trustee's objection should be sustained.

  2. In re Espey

    347 B.R. 357 (Bankr. D. Minn. 2006)

    The same court apparently later held, on a trustee's objection based particularly on the "local" issue, that the EIC is not a "local public assistance benefit" under Iowa law. See In re Boyett, 250 B.R. 822, 824-825 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2000), citingMatter of Peckham, No. 97-01117-WH (Bankr. S.D. Iowa 1998) (unpublished); Matter of Crouch, No. 96-23085-D (Bankr. N.D.Iowa 1997) (holding that an EIC was neither a social security benefit nor a local public assistance benefit). In determining that "federal disaster relief payments may [not] be exempted as local public assistance," the Boyett court noted that "several cases in which bankruptcy courts held that [EIC] federal tax refunds . . . were exempt under state statutes exempting public assistance benefits," were "all off point, because the statutes discussed did not limit exemption of public assistance to `local' public assistance."

  3. McFarland v. Wallace

    516 B.R. 665 (S.D. Ga. 2014)   Cited 3 times

    2012); In re Ambrose, 179 B.R. 982, 984 n. 2 (Bankr.S.D.Ga.1995); In re Boyett, 250 B.R. 822, 824 (Bankr.S.D.Ga.2000). Many jurisdictions have held that state bankruptcy-only exemption laws are consistent with the Supremacy Clause.

  4. In re Connors

    348 B.R. 1 (Bankr. D. Me. 2006)   Cited 1 times

    Cf., e.g., In re Boyett, 250 B.R. 822, 825-26 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2000) (federal crop loss disaster benefits are not "local public assistance" under Georgia exemption statute). See also, supra, n. 10 (recognizing cases in which EITC is found to be exempt under state exemption statutes in which the term "public assistance" is not modified by "local").

  5. In re Legier

    Bankruptcy No. 03-19115, SECTION "B" (Bankr. E.D. La. Jul. 12, 2004)

    " Thus, the statutory legal authority and controlling case law in this circuit mandate that the court reject the debtor's argument. In re Boyett, 250 B.R. 822, 826 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. 2000), quoting In re Garrett, 225 B.R. 301, 303 (Bankr. W.D.N.Y. 1998).

  6. In re Gilchrist

    Chapter 7 Case Number 01-10438 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. Dec. 3, 2001)

    In Georgia, debtors in bankruptcy are limited to federal non-bankruptcy exemptions and the list of state exemptions under O.C.G.A. § 44-13-100. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A); In the Matter of Ambrose, 179 B.R. 982, 984 n. 2 (Bankr.S.D.Ga. 1995) ("a debtor who files bankruptcy while domiciled in Georgia is limited to the list of exemptions found in O.C.G.A. § 44-13-100(a)"); see also In re Boyett, 250 B.R. 822, 824 (Bankr.S.D.Ga. 2000). Local homestead exemptions from ad valorem taxes are not included in the O.C.G.A. § 44-13-100 list of exemptions available to debtors in bankruptcy.