I started this discussion in a previous post, you can catch up here.
The Court could have decided the objection to exemption in 3 different ways. He could have taken the position that trustee argued: guns are never exempt as household furnishings. It would be unlikely that he took the position that guns are always exempt. What he did decide is that the statute uses the phrase “reasonably necessary”, and that requires an appropriate factual showing.
My strategy was to show that each debtor had a reason that they needed their guns. One debtor had food that he shot in the refrigerator. Another had very specific concerns about personal security.
If a debtor (the person filing bankruptcy) does own a home, they are entitled to a grubstake exemption of $25,000. They can claim an exemption of anything, including guns, in that $25,000 exemption.
Guns can be claimed exempt as a tool in appropriate circumstances, such as someone who is employed as a peace officer.
A good result in a bankruptcy requires a specialized knowledge. Set an appointment to discuss your options.
Speak Your Mind