11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(A) (1994). In re Cunningham, 354 B.R. 547, 553 (D. Mass. 2006) ("It is hornbook bankruptcy law that a debtor's exemptions are determined as of the time of the filing of his petition."). Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 4003 governs objections to claimed exemptions.
In a thorough and well-reasoned opinion, the court found that the conversion of the homestead property into proceeds by means of voluntary sale does not remove the protections of § 522(c) from the property. In re Cunningham, 354 B.R. 547, 557 (D.Mass. 2006). On appeal to us, Pasquina claims that the district court incorrectly applied federal bankruptcy law to protect funds that should have been available to satisfy a nondischargeable debt.
But it is "hornbook bankruptcy law that a debtor's exemptions are determined as of the time of the filing of his petition." In re Cunningham , 354 B.R. 547, 553 (D. Mass. 2006) ; see alsoIn re Richey , 2011 WL 4485900, at *10 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. Aug. 8, 2011) ("[The] proper date for determining whether [an] exemption exists is the petition date." (citing Owen v. Owen , 500 U.S. 305, 314 n.6, 111 S.Ct. 1833, 114 L.Ed.2d 350 (1991) )). "This means the Court must ‘focus only on the law and facts as they exist on the date of filing the petition. ’ "
That is, that after the objection period for the Debtor's homestead exemption expired, the Property was no longer property of the estate because there was no equity remaining above the consensual liens and the homestead that could benefit the estate. In support, the Firm cites to In re Cunningham, 2006 WL 3438560 (D. Mass. 2006), In re McCabe, 2006 WL 3392469 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2006), and In re Reed, 184 B.R. 733 (Bankr. W.D. Tex. 1995).
S.D. Fla. 2007) ("Bankruptcy exemptions are determined by application of law to facts as the law and facts exist at filing of the petition, not earlier or later."); In re Cunningham, 354 B.R. 547, 553 (D. Mass. 2006) ("It is hornbook bankruptcy law that a debtor's exemptions are determined as of the time of the filing of his petition. This means the Court must focus only on the law and facts as they exist on the date of filing the petition") (citations omitted) (internal quotations omitted). If, as argued by the Trustee, this rule does not apply in this case, the bankruptcy court should articulate why this is so.
In the event a plan is abandoned, the employer should promptly notify the district director, stating the circumstances which led to the discontinuance of the plan.Pasquina v. Cunningham (In re Cunningham), 354 B.R. 547, 553 (D. Mass. 2006), aff'd, 513 F.3d 318 (1st Cir. 2008). See also Armstrong v. Peterson (In re Peterson), 897 F.2d 935, 937 (8th Cir. 1990) ("[W]e hold today that only the facts existing on the date of filing are relevant to determining whether a debtor qualifies for a claimed exemption." (emphasis added));
Finally, it is well-established law that a debtor's rights in a claimed exemption are established on the petition date. SeeWilliam J. Pasquina, P.C. v. Cunningham (In re Cunningham) , 354 B.R. 547, 553 (D. Mass. 2006) ("It is hornbook bankruptcy law that a debtor's exemptions are determined as of the time of the filing of his petition. This means [that] the Court must focus only on the law and facts as they exist on the date of filing the petition.
Also see In re Ellis, 446 B.R. 22, 24 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2011) ("[r]ights to exemptions are fixed as of the date of the petition"); In re Andris, 471B.R. 761, 763 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2012) ("exemptions are fixed as of the date of the petition"); Pasquina v. Cunningham (In re Cunningham), 354 B.R. 547, 553 (D. Mass. 2006) ("It is hornbook bankruptcy law that a debtor's exemptions are determined as of the time of the filing of his petition."); In re Peterson, 897 F.2d 935, 937 (8th Cir. 1990) (the court must "focus only on the law and facts as they exist on the date of filing the petition.").
.Section 522(b)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that exemptions on property, afforded by either federal or state law, are applicable as of “date of the filing of the petition”. Also see In re Pérez Hernández, 487 B.R. at 364 (“the Bankruptcy Code provides that exemptions on property, afforded by either federal or state law, are applicable as of date of the filing of the petition”); In re Ellis, 446 B.R. 22, 24 (Bankr.D.Mass.2011) (“[r]ights to exemptions are fixed as of the date of the petition”); In re Andris, 471 B.R. 761, 763 (Bankr.D.Mass.2012) (“exemptions are fixed as of the date of the petition”); Pasquina v. Cunningham (In re Cunningham), 354 B.R. 547, 553 (D.Mass.2006) (“It is hornbook bankruptcy law that a debtor's exemptions are determined as of the time of the filing of his petition.”); In re Peterson, 897 F.2d 935, 937 (8th Cir.1990) (the court must “focus only on the law and facts as they exist on the date of filing the petition.”).
Also see In re Ellis, 446 B.R. 22, 24 (Bankr.D.Mass.2011) (“[r]ights to exemptions are fixed as of the date of the petition”); In re Andris, 471 B.R. 761, 763 (Bankr.D.Mass.2012) ( “exemptions are fixed as of the date of the petition”); Pasquina v. Cunningham (In re Cunningham), 354 B.R. 547, 553 (D.Mass.2006) (“It is hornbook bankruptcy law that a debtor's exemptions are determined as of the time of the filing of his petition.”); In re Peterson, 897 F.2d 935, 937 (8th Cir.1990) (the court must “focus only on the law and facts as they exist on the date of filing the petition.”).