Bernard

Bernard v. Coyne (In re Bernard)

Good Law
40 F.3d 1028·94 Daily Journal DAR 16364·1994 WL 651080·32 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 508·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 32871
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 21, 1994No. 93-55255California2,398 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kozinski, J.

This bankruptcy case presents both a procedural and a substantive question: first, whether objections to a debtor’s claimed exemptions were timely under Bankruptcy Rule 4003(b); and second, whether a fully matured annuity policy is exempt under California law.

*1030 I

On October 7, 1991, Alan and Linda Bernard filed for relief under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. Among the assets they claimed as exempt were $5000 in recently earned wages and a $250,000 annuity policy. As part of a process that has come to be known as pre-petition planning, the Bernards had extracted most of the value from their home by borrowing against the equity, and then, just ten days before filing for bankruptcy, bought the annuity with the borrowed money.

The Chapter 7 trustee convened the meeting of creditors under 11 U.S.C. § 341 (a) on November 13, 1991. Understandably suspicious of the Bernards’ annuity exemption claim, the trustee asked to see documents relating to the policy. Because the Bernards didn’t have the documents with them, the trustee adjourned the meeting until December 2. He instructed the Bernards to bring the requested documents on that date or, preferably, to mail them to his…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.