Tarrant v. Spenard Builders Supply, Inc. (In Re Tarrant)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that in a § 522(f) lien avoidance action the proper valuation date is the date of the filing of the petition for relief under the Code
• holding that absent showing that a creditor’s position was materially and detrimentally altered, lach-es does not apply, and “the fresh start policy embodied in the exemptions granted debtors by the Code outweighs any interest in finality which creditors might have”
• “the filing of a petition constitutes a ‘point of cleavage’ at which exemptions are determined.” citing White v. Stump, 266 U.S. 310, 45 S.Ct. 103, 69 L.Ed. 301 (1924); In re Sajkowski, 49 B.R. 37 (Bankr.D.R.I.1985); In re Myers, 17 B.R. 410 (Bankr.E.D.Cal.1982
• “even a direct application of § 506(a) would not alter the conclusion that exempt property is to be valued as of the date of the filing of the Chapter 7 petition_ Congress intended that valuation be made as of the date of filing of the petition.” Id. at 366
• pre-petition liens avoided by post-discharge complaint
• pre-petition liens avoided by post-discharge complaint

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).