In Re Booth
309 B.R. 568, 51 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 1307, 2004 Bankr. LEXIS 415 (2004)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Missouri law, the creation of a tenancy by the entirety in personal property, such as a motor vehicle, requires the coexistence of the four unities of interest, time, title, and possession. Property acquired by one spouse before marriage or titled solely in one spouse's name after marriage does not satisfy these unities and therefore cannot be claimed as exempt entireties property.
Facts:
- On September 18, 1993, Raymond D. Booth purchased a 1979 MG with his separate funds and titled it solely in his name.
- On March 2, 1994, Booth purchased a 1994 Ford Thunderbird, titling it solely in his name, though he used funds from a joint checking account he held with his then-fiancée, Wanda Fay Staude.
- On December 3, 1994, Booth married Wanda.
- On February 5, 1996, after his marriage, Booth purchased a 1994 3-Wheeler using funds from a joint checking account with Wanda, but the vehicle was titled solely in Booth's name.
- Wanda used the MG and the Thunderbird, was an insured driver on them, and believed all three vehicles were marital property.
- Booth and Wanda never retitled any of the vehicles to include both of their names as tenants by the entirety.
- Booth and Wanda had no joint debts that could be paid from entireties property.
Procedural Posture:
- Raymond D. Booth ('Debtor') filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Missouri.
- In his bankruptcy schedules, the Debtor claimed an exemption for three motor vehicles, asserting they were owned as tenants by the entirety with his wife.
- The Chapter 13 Trustee objected to the Debtor's claimed exemptions in the three vehicles.
- The Trustee also filed a motion to deny confirmation of the Debtor’s proposed Chapter 13 plan, arguing it did not properly account for the non-exempt value of the vehicles.
- The bankruptcy court held a hearing on the Trustee's objection and motion to deny confirmation.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does personal property, specifically motor vehicles, qualify for a tenancy by the entirety exemption under Missouri law when some vehicles were acquired by one spouse prior to the marriage and all vehicles are titled solely in that one spouse's name?
Opinions:
Majority - Venters, C.J.
No. Personal property titled solely in one spouse's name does not qualify for a tenancy by the entirety exemption because it fails to meet the required four unities of interest, time, title, and possession. For the two vehicles acquired before the marriage (the MG and Thunderbird), the unities of time and title were not met at the moment of acquisition, as Wanda was not yet married to Booth nor was she on the title. The fact that they may be considered 'marital property' for dissolution purposes is irrelevant to the strict property law requirements for creating a tenancy by the entirety. For the 3-Wheeler acquired during the marriage, the exemption also fails because there was no conveyance to both spouses; the certificate of ownership was issued in the Debtor's name alone, which under Missouri's motor vehicle statute is 'fraudulent and void' as to any purported sale to Wanda. Therefore, the presumption of a tenancy by the entirety never arises, and the property is not exempt from the Debtor's individual creditors.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the strict, common-law requirements for creating a tenancy by the entirety in Missouri, particularly for titled personal property. The court firmly separates the equitable concept of 'marital property' used in dissolution proceedings from the specific legal requirements for a form of ownership that shields assets from creditors. This case serves as a clear warning that intent alone is insufficient; the formal requirements of title are paramount for motor vehicles. For bankruptcy practitioners, it clarifies that assets will not be shielded by a tenancy by the entirety exemption unless the four unities are strictly met at the time of acquisition and reflected on the certificate of title.
