Summary:
Ms. Roger inherited real property from her mother, which included a residence and a building originally used as a country store, which was subsequently renovated into a residential rental property. After obtaining a mortgage against the entire property, Ms. Rogers, with the consent of the lienholder, subdivided the residence and the rental properties. Upon filing Chapter 13, Ms. Rogers claimed both properties under her homestead exemption, as the two were previous a single parcel and the rental property produced revenue necessary for payment of taxes and insurance on both.
Relying on both the definitions of the term "residence" from the dictionary and the Bankruptcy Code at 11 U.S.C. § 101(13A), including the related term "incidental property" at § 101 (27B), the court held that the adjacent property did not fall within any of these, particularly as the rent derived was completely separate from the residence, particularly as the tenant was neither a dependent nor even relative.
For a copy of the opinion, please see:
Rogers- Denial of Homestead Exemption in Adjacent Property
Blog comments