IN MATTER OF PRENTICE (Bankr.N.D.Ind. 4-25-2005)

IN THE MATTER OF: BRYAN EARL PRENTICE MINDY SUE PRENTICE Debtors.

Case No. 02-11615.United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana, Fort Wayne Division.
April 25, 2005

DECISION AND ORDER ON DEBTORS’ MOTION TO AVOID A JUDICIAL LIEN
ROBERT GRANT, Bankruptcy Judge

At Fort Wayne, Indiana, on April 25, 2005

On January 25, 2005, debtors filed a motion to avoid a judicial lien held by Star Bank. The court denied that motion by a decision and order issued on March 2, 2005. On April 1, 2005, the debtors filed essentially the same motion a second time. The court has already ruled that the debtors are not entitled to avoid Star Bank’s judicial lien and it should not have to do so again. Nonetheless, at the risk of being redundant, the court points out that § 522(f) does not permit avoidance of a judicial lien unless an exemption has actually been claimed in the property. Swaim v. Kleven, 1:04-CV-33 (D.N.D. Ind. 2004). Seealso, In re Berryhill, 254 B.R. 242, 243 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 2000). Since the debtors have not claimed an exemption in the property subject to Star Bank’s lien, their motion to avoid that lien is DENIED.[1]

SO ORDERED.

[1] The court would also point out that this case was originally closed on July 31, 2002 and was reopened at the debtors’ request on January 1, 2005, so that they could attempt to avoid Star Bank’s judicial lien. Since they failed to claim any exemption in the property subject to that lien before their case was closed, they cannot amend their claimed exemptions to do so now. See, In re Clear, 1992 WL 1359570 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 1992).

Page 1