Whitney v. Beneficial Colorado, Inc. (In Re Whitney)

70 B.R. 443, 1987 Bankr. LEXIS 236
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado
DecidedFebruary 23, 1987
Docket17-19579
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 70 B.R. 443 (Whitney v. Beneficial Colorado, Inc. (In Re Whitney)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Whitney v. Beneficial Colorado, Inc. (In Re Whitney), 70 B.R. 443, 1987 Bankr. LEXIS 236 (Colo. 1987).

Opinion

ORDER

ROLAND J. BRUMBAUGH, Bankruptcy Judge.

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Debtors’ Motion to Void Lien under 11 U.S.C. § 522(f) and the Objection thereto by Beneficial Colorado, Inc.

Admissions by the parties have left only one issue for determination, i.e., is a stere.o system (speakers, tuner, tape decks and equalizer) or a 35 mm camera with telephoto lens, tripod and flash, property which can be claimed as exempt under § 13-54-102(1)(e), C.R.S.

The camera and related equipment are not subject to exemption as “household goods” as defined in § 13-54-101(4), C.R.S. In interpreting § 13-54-101(5), C.R.S., the predecessor to § 13-54-101(4), former Judge Keller of this District held that cameras and projectors were not household goods. This Court sees no reason to change that ruling. In re Ruppe, 3 B.R. 60 (Bankr.Colo.1980).

The stereo system is an issue of first impression. In the Ruppe case, no argument was made on this issue and apparently both parties agreed that an AM/FM radio, a turntable, and an 8-track tape recorder were “household goods”.

Section 13-54-101(4) lists, by way of illustration, certain specific items that are “household goods”. That list includes television sets and radio sets. This Court can see no significant difference in TV and radio sets and the stereo system under consideration here. It is, therefore,

ORDERED that the Debtors’ Motion to Void Lien is granted as to the stereo system and denied as to the camera and related equipment.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Roffle
216 B.R. 290 (D. Colorado, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
70 B.R. 443, 1987 Bankr. LEXIS 236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whitney-v-beneficial-colorado-inc-in-re-whitney-cob-1987.