AllExperts > Bankruptcy Law 
Search      
Bankruptcy Law
Volunteer
Answers to thousands of questions
 Home · More Bankruptcy Law Questions · Answer Library  · Encyclopedia ·
More Bankruptcy Law Answers
Question Library

Ask a question about Bankruptcy Law
Volunteer
Experts of the Month
Expert Login

Awards

About Us
Tell friends
Link to Us
Disclaimer

 
 
 
 
About Mark J. Markus- California Bankruptcy Attorney
Expertise
Mark J. Markus is a Los Angeles attorney who has practiced exclusively bankruptcy law in California since 1991 and is rated A+ by the Better Business Bureau. He represents debtors, creditors, and Trustees in Chapter 7, Chapter 11, and Chapter 13 of the bankruptcy code throughout California.


Experience
Visit http://www.bklaw.com for more information on bankruptcy in general and Mark J. Markus in particular. Many questions are answered on the web page (hint, hint).
The Markus webpage also contains more information on
  • business bankruptcy,
  • chapter 7 bankruptcy,
  • chapter 11 bankruptcy,
  • chapter 13 bankruptcy,
  • Frequently Asked Bankruptcy Questions

    Also visit our new bankruptcy blog for interesting articles and much more.



    Education/Credentials
    J.D., University of Arizona 1990. B.A. Economics, California State University, Northridge 1986. For more details please click here

  •  
       

    You are here:  Experts > Business > Corporate Law > Bankruptcy Law > lien avoidance ch7

    Bankruptcy Law - lien avoidance ch7


    Expert: Mark J. Markus- California Bankruptcy Attorney - 8/27/2009

    Question
    I am a new atty and have a ch 7 case where the first mortgage equals or exceeds the value of the real property.  There is also a judgement lien that holds second lien position.  If there was equity, I believe that I could avoid the Judgement lien, but does it impair the exemption?  Do you think that I can still avoid the lien, my client wants to keep the house and pay the mortgage.  Thanks.

    Answer
    The answer differs depending on the circuit your case is filed in and the exemptions laws which apply in your case.  I have successfully argued that there does not need to be equity in order for the exemption to be impaired.  One thing I believe is required is that you have to actually TAKE the exemption in Schedule "C" even if there is no equity.

    There is a line of cases on this, at least in the 9th circuit.  Just research 522(f) and "no equity".   See for example,  In re Higgins, 201 B.R. 965 (9th Cir. BAP 1996).

    http://www.bklaw.com/

    Ask a Question


     
    User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Kids' Privacy Policy | Help
    Copyright  © 2008 About, Inc. AllExperts, AllExperts.com, and About.com are registered trademarks of About, Inc. All rights reserved.