In re Bailey
Decision Date | 17 February 1959 |
Docket Number | No. B-343-L.,B-343-L. |
Citation | 172 F. Supp. 925 |
Parties | In the Matter of Merle Ernest BAILEY, Bankrupt. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Nebraska |
Paul Galter, Wagener, Marx & Galter, Lincoln, Neb., for bankrupt.
Emory P. Burnett, trustee, Lincoln, Neb., pro se.
This matter is before the Court on a petition to review the Referee's order denying a claim that certain property is exempt.
Petitioner in Schedule B-5 claimed as exempt under Section 25-1556, R.R.S. 1943, "truck and tools and equipment used in painting business". The trustee's report of exempt property denied the claimed exemption of the truck.
The question is whether the Bankrupt's panel truck falls within the following exemption contained in Section 25-1556 (R.R.S.1943):
"No property hereinafter mentioned shall be liable to attachment, execution or sale on any final process issued from any court in this state, against any person being a resident of this state and the head of a family: * * * (8) the tools and instruments of any mechanic, miner or other person, used and kept for the purpose of carrying on his trade or business: * * *"
The bankrupt is clearly a resident and the head of a family. He uses the panel truck to carry paint, tarps, ladders, brushes, etc. to the jobs which he has obtained as a small painting contractor. Certain portions of the truck have been especially adapted for this use. The Court is in agreement with the findings of fact made by the Referee as follows:
In his conclusions of law, the referee concludes that the truck was not within the exemption set out above. The bankrupt contends that the truck is within the words: "tools and instruments of any * * * person, used and kept for the purpose of carrying on his trade or business."
The point here at issue has never been decided by the Nebraska Supreme Court.
In the annotations to the Nebraska statute, the Reviser of Statutes, an able and experienced Nebraska lawyer, has set forth the following: The referee, in analyzing that case concludes that the case is not a square holding to that effect because the exemption was claimed not only under the statute above cited, but also under § 25-1552 which exempts $500 in personal property when the debtor has no homestead.
The original bankruptcy petition of Burden claimed in Schedule B-5 as exempt under the state laws, certain listed property including a "1939 1½ Ton Chevrolet Truck." There were cited both Sections 25-1552 and 25-1556 as well as Sections 25-1553 and 25-1554, and also because of the claim that an insurance policy was exempt, Section 44-371. In the application to release the truck from the execution which had been levied, all four sections, to wit, 25-1552, 25-1553, 25-1554 and 25-1556 were set forth as the basis for the application. The report of the referee found in paragraph 10 that the trustee filed his report of exempt property and set the truck off to the bankrupt as his exempt property under the laws of the State of Nebraska, and the provisions of the bankruptcy act and that no exceptions were taken to the report. The bankruptcy court entered an order approving the trustee's report of exemptions and the truck was set off as exempt and no exceptions were taken. In the hearing before the referee it was contended that the bankrupt claimed the truck as exempt under the laws of the State of Nebraska. It appears that it was argued that it was exempt both under the specific exemption statute, namely, as a tool of trade and under the $500 monetary exemption statute in lieu of a homestead. The referee in bankruptcy found the property to be exempt without specifying the section of the statute relied on. The court in review found that when levied upon, the truck had a value greater than $500 but due to an accident it was at the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
In re Longnecker
...the parties are aware, Nebraska's exemption statutes have long been liberally construed in favor of the debtor. In re Bailey , 172 F. Supp. 925, 927 (D. Neb. 1959). "Statutory exemption laws are founded upon public policy. Each state has a right, as well as a duty, to protect an unfortunate......
-
In re Seacord
...California, Louisiana, Washington, Kansas and Nebraska. Although not controlling, a review of these cases is helpful. In Matter of Bailey, 172 F.Supp. 925 (D.Neb.1959) the bankrupt was a painting contractor who owned a panel truck which he used to carry paint, tarps, ladders, and brushes to......
-
In re Burch
...Transfer Binder, Bankr.L.Rep. (CCH) ¶ 62,893 (D.C.Calif.1968); Lopp v. Lopp, 198 Cal.App.2d 474, 18 Cal.Rptr. 338 (1961); In re Bailey, 172 F.Supp. 925 (D.Neb.1959); Penrose v. Stevens, 100 Colo. 83, 65 P.2d 697 (1937); Dowd v. Heuson, 122 Kan. 278, 252 P. 260 (1927) 3 In re Damron, supra a......
-
In re Dubrock
...for real and personal property as well as for bankruptcy exemptions. 3 In re Trotter, 97 F.Supp. 249 (D.C.La.1951); In re Bailey, 172 F.Supp. 925 (D.C.Neb.1959); In re Spiewalk, 1967-1970 Transfer Binder Bankr.L.Rep. (CCH) ¶ 62,893 (D.C.Cal.1968); In re Frank, 1970-1973 Transfer Binder Bank......