A gun is exempt as household goods depending on where the debtor lives (and the purpose the debtor assigns to keeping a firearm).
A couple in Connecticut claimed that a .22 caliber, lever-action rifle was exempt as household goods. The trustee objected to the exemption claim.
Although exemptions must be liberally construed in favor of the debtor, Bankruptcy Judge James J. Tancredi of Hartford, Conn., denied the exemption in an opinion on November 20.
The claim was governed by Connecticut law, which exempts “[n]ecessary apparel, bedding, foodstuffs, household furniture and appliances.” Judge Tancredi said that the statute “clearly and unambiguously lays out” the types of property that are exempt. Even the “most liberal” construction of the statute would not uphold the exemption claim, he said.
In similar circumstances, Judge Tancredi said that courts elsewhere “have weighed certain facts, such as the debtor’s cultural environment and geographic location, to determine whether a firearm qualified as a household good that was used in such a way to facilitate the daily operation and support of the household.”
For instance, Judge Tancredi said that rifles used to acquire food for the family have been ruled exempt as household goods in Kentucky and Montana. In Georgia, Bankruptcy Judge W. Homer Drake, Jr. upheld the exemption for a rifle claimed to be used for defense. The trustee contended that only a handgun was suitable for defense, but Judge Drake said that the length of the barrel makes no difference. In re Crawford, 226 B.R. 484, 485 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1998).
Judge Tancredi stopped short of ruling that guns are never exempt in Connecticut.
In support of the exemption, the debtors did not contend that the rifle was used for defense or to supply food. The debtors only said that the rifle was “a family heirloom with great sentimental value to the Debtors.”
The debtors were not entitled to an exemption, Judge Tancredi said, because they “failed to provide any evidence of how the Firearm is deployed in the household.”
Observation
Basing an exemption claim on the Second Amendment should enhance the chance of a ruling in favor of the debtor. So long as a firearm is legal to own, a debtor could state that a handgun or rifle is used for defense.
A gun is exempt as household goods depending on where the debtor lives (and the purpose the debtor assigns to keeping a firearm).
A couple in Connecticut claimed that a .22 caliber, lever-action rifle was exempt as household goods. The trustee objected to the exemption claim.
Although exemptions must be liberally construed in favor of the debtor, Bankruptcy Judge James J. Tancredi of Hartford, Conn., denied the exemption in an opinion on November 20.
The claim was governed by Connecticut law, which exempts “[n]ecessary apparel, bedding, foodstuffs, household furniture and appliances.” Judge Tancredi said that the statute “clearly and unambiguously lays out” the types of property that are exempt. Even the “most liberal” construction of the statute would not uphold the exemption claim, he said.
In similar circumstances, Judge Tancredi said that courts elsewhere “have weighed certain facts, such as the debtor’s cultural environment and geographic location, to determine whether a firearm qualified as a household good that was used in such a way to facilitate the daily operation and support of the household.”