Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Lawrence Danduran, Jr. v. Kip M. Kaler
Date: 11-23-2010
Case Number: 10-6042
Judge: Ventes
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on appeal from the District of North Dakota (Cass County)
Plaintiff's Attorney: Jon R. Brakke and Caren W. Stanley, Vogel Law Firm, Fargo, North Dakota
Defendant's Attorney: Kip M. Keler, Keler Doeling Law Office, Fargo, North Dakota
Description:
The Debtor appeals the bankruptcy court's order sustaining the Trustee's objection to a portion ($7,700) of the Debtor's homestead exemption. For the reasons set forth below, we reverse.
I. STANDARD OF REVIEW
Findings of fact are reviewed for clear error, and legal conclusions are reviewed de novo.1 A bankruptcy court's denial of a claim of exemption is a final, appealable order.2
II. BACKGROUND
On September 15, 2009, the Debtor sold his homestead for $225,000. From the proceeds, the Debtor paid $140,860.38 to satisfy a mortgage held by Washington Mutual and deposited $83,139.62 into a savings account he established for the specific purpose of receiving the proceeds of his homestead. The only other money placed in the account was $1,000 from the buyers' down payment and $3,079.04 Washington Mutual refunded from his escrow account. Thus, the entire balance of the Debtor's savings account – $87,501.55 – constituted proceeds of the Debtor's homestead.3 On December 31, 2009, the Debtor filed a voluntary petition for Chapter 7 bankruptcy relief in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of North Dakota. The Debtor claimed a homestead exemption pursuant to N.D. Cent. Code § 28-22-02(7) in the entire $87,501.55 in his savings account. The Chapter 7 trustee, Kip Kaler ("Trusteeâ€), objected to this exemption claim, asserting that $7,700 of the money in his savings account wasn't exempt because those funds were proceeds of certain nonexempt personal property4 included in the sale of Debtor's homestead.
The bankruptcy court held an evidentiary hearing on the Trustee's objection on May 26, 2010, at which time the Debtor testified that the personal property was included in the sale only at the buyers' request and that no value was attributed to it. The Debtor's testimony was uncontradicted and corroborated by the real estate contract which did not apportion any of the purchase price to the personal property. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Bankruptcy Court found that $7,700 of the money in the Debtor's savings account constituted proceeds from the sale of personal property and were therefore not exempt as proceeds from his homestead. This appeal ensued.
III. DISCUSSION
The Debtor's primary argument on appeal is that the Trustee's objection should have been overruled because, in the absence of any evidence or allegation that he intended to hinder, delay, or defraud his creditors, the Debtor's alleged sale of the personal property was a permissible conversion of non-exempt assets into exempt homestead proceeds.5 In other words, to the extent any proceeds from the sale of his home are attributable to the personal property,6 the Debtor maintains that those proceeds went to the mortgage lender, thereby increasing the amount of equity the Debtor could claim as exempt under N.D. Cent. Code § 47-18-01.
The Trustee counters here, as he did at trial, that the non-exempt proceeds of the personal property were not converted into exempt homestead proceeds because the Debtor did not indicate his intent to engage in such pre-bankruptcy planning at the time of the transaction. We disagree.
As with most exemptions, the North Dakota homestead exemption is to be construed liberally in favor of a debtor.7 And under North Dakota law, the proceeds from the sale of a homestead are exempt to the same extent as the homestead.8 In view of these principles and the Eighth Circuit's permissive approach to nonfraudulent, pre-bankruptcy planning,9 we find the Debtor's establishment of a savings account for the specific purpose of depositing the proceeds of his homestead and his subsequent deposit into that account of the proceeds from the personal property (allegedly) sold with his homestead sufficient indicia of his intent to convert nonexempt personal property into exempt, homestead property. Because the record is devoid of any contrary evidence or evidence that the Debtor acted with fraudulent intent when he converted non-exempt property into exempt property, the Debtor is entitled to claim the entire $87,501.55 in his savings account as his homestead exemption claim.
* * *
See: http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/10/11/106042P.pdf
I. STANDARD OF REVIEW
Findings of fact are reviewed for clear error, and legal conclusions are reviewed de novo.1 A bankruptcy court's denial of a claim of exemption is a final, appealable order.2
II. BACKGROUND
On September 15, 2009, the Debtor sold his homestead for $225,000. From the proceeds, the Debtor paid $140,860.38 to satisfy a mortgage held by Washington Mutual and deposited $83,139.62 into a savings account he established for the specific purpose of receiving the proceeds of his homestead. The only other money placed in the account was $1,000 from the buyers' down payment and $3,079.04 Washington Mutual refunded from his escrow account. Thus, the entire balance of the Debtor's savings account – $87,501.55 – constituted proceeds of the Debtor's homestead.3 On December 31, 2009, the Debtor filed a voluntary petition for Chapter 7 bankruptcy relief in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of North Dakota. The Debtor claimed a homestead exemption pursuant to N.D. Cent. Code § 28-22-02(7) in the entire $87,501.55 in his savings account. The Chapter 7 trustee, Kip Kaler ("Trusteeâ€), objected to this exemption claim, asserting that $7,700 of the money in his savings account wasn't exempt because those funds were proceeds of certain nonexempt personal property4 included in the sale of Debtor's homestead.
The bankruptcy court held an evidentiary hearing on the Trustee's objection on May 26, 2010, at which time the Debtor testified that the personal property was included in the sale only at the buyers' request and that no value was attributed to it. The Debtor's testimony was uncontradicted and corroborated by the real estate contract which did not apportion any of the purchase price to the personal property. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Bankruptcy Court found that $7,700 of the money in the Debtor's savings account constituted proceeds from the sale of personal property and were therefore not exempt as proceeds from his homestead. This appeal ensued.
III. DISCUSSION
The Debtor's primary argument on appeal is that the Trustee's objection should have been overruled because, in the absence of any evidence or allegation that he intended to hinder, delay, or defraud his creditors, the Debtor's alleged sale of the personal property was a permissible conversion of non-exempt assets into exempt homestead proceeds.5 In other words, to the extent any proceeds from the sale of his home are attributable to the personal property,6 the Debtor maintains that those proceeds went to the mortgage lender, thereby increasing the amount of equity the Debtor could claim as exempt under N.D. Cent. Code § 47-18-01.
The Trustee counters here, as he did at trial, that the non-exempt proceeds of the personal property were not converted into exempt homestead proceeds because the Debtor did not indicate his intent to engage in such pre-bankruptcy planning at the time of the transaction. We disagree.
As with most exemptions, the North Dakota homestead exemption is to be construed liberally in favor of a debtor.7 And under North Dakota law, the proceeds from the sale of a homestead are exempt to the same extent as the homestead.8 In view of these principles and the Eighth Circuit's permissive approach to nonfraudulent, pre-bankruptcy planning,9 we find the Debtor's establishment of a savings account for the specific purpose of depositing the proceeds of his homestead and his subsequent deposit into that account of the proceeds from the personal property (allegedly) sold with his homestead sufficient indicia of his intent to convert nonexempt personal property into exempt, homestead property. Because the record is devoid of any contrary evidence or evidence that the Debtor acted with fraudulent intent when he converted non-exempt property into exempt property, the Debtor is entitled to claim the entire $87,501.55 in his savings account as his homestead exemption claim.
* * *
See: http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/10/11/106042P.pdf
Outcome:
For the reasons stated above, we reverse the bankruptcy court’s order sustaining the Trustee’s objection to the Debtor’s homestead exemption claim.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of Lawrence Danduran, Jr. v. Kip M. Kaler?
The outcome was: For the reasons stated above, we reverse the bankruptcy court’s order sustaining the Trustee’s objection to the Debtor’s homestead exemption claim.
Which court heard Lawrence Danduran, Jr. v. Kip M. Kaler?
This case was heard in United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on appeal from the District of North Dakota (Cass County), ND. The presiding judge was Ventes.
Who were the attorneys in Lawrence Danduran, Jr. v. Kip M. Kaler?
Plaintiff's attorney: Jon R. Brakke and Caren W. Stanley, Vogel Law Firm, Fargo, North Dakota. Defendant's attorney: Kip M. Keler, Keler Doeling Law Office, Fargo, North Dakota.
When was Lawrence Danduran, Jr. v. Kip M. Kaler decided?
This case was decided on November 23, 2010.