"Later will be too late." Thomas Friedman's words echoed throughout Wait Chapel of Wake Forest University as over 2,000 people listened intently to the wisdom of the three time Pulitzer Prize winner. Friedman had come to Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, North Carolina on February 10th to begin a two-day Voices of Our Time lecture series on energy.

 

His one-hour long speech was centered around his newest book, Hot, Flat, and Crowded- Why We Need a Green Revolution-And How It Can Renew America. Friedman's well-known reputation and oratorical prowess provided the audience with a compelling argument in favor of a Green Revolution. He asserted that the time is now for the United States to initiate a globalized ideology pertaining to the environment. Friedman claimed that we are currently in the midst of the beginning stages of a new revolution known as the Energy Technology Revolution. In this new era, our tireless efforts at continual technological advancement must be geared towards energy efficiency.

 

Friedman briefly addressed the problem of American complacency and how it could potentially hinder the ET Revolution. He admitted that ever since the end of the Cold War, Americans had developed a habit of perpetual laziness and overall indifference to hard-work. However, Friedman asserted that the American complacency has no place within the realms of energy efficiency. The recently adopted American ideology of "I'll do it later" must cease to exist because when it comes to preserving the environment, later will ultimately be too late.  

A MAN'S HOME RULED NOT TO BE HIS CASTLE
 
Lester P. Taroff, a Partner in the firm's Creditors' Rights Department, received a decision from the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Suffolk, which denied a judgment-debtor the right to claim a homestead exemption for his "motor home".  Under New York law, CPLR §5206, there exists a $50,000.00 Homestead Exemption to enforcement of a money judgment against the judgment-debtor's principal residence.   Included in the exemption statute as property covered by the exemption are "mobile homes".
 
The firm's client had obtained a judgment against the owner of the recreational vehicle "RV" and sought to have it sold by the Suffolk County Sheriff to satisfy the judgment.  The judgment-debtor objected to this action, claiming it to be a "motor home" and his primary residence, continuously occupying it as such for over a year, and therefore entitled to the Homestead Exemption under New York law.
 
In a decision of first impression, Justice Paul J. Baisley, Jr. concluded that a "motor home" or "RV", as opposed to a "mobile home", did not qualify for the Homestead Exemption.  The Judge concluded that, after applying common definitions of each, the "mobile home" was designed to be a semi-permanent structure and that a "motor home" was "...a large motor vehicle equipped as living quarters." 
 
It is obvious that a "motor home" is essentially an automobile.  An automobile owned by a judgment-debtor can be seized and sold to satisfy a judgment.   A proper result was inevitable under that rationale.
 
The vehicle was sold at Sheriff's auction in 2009.  The client was very pleased with the result and, as the successful bidder, left on vacation to see America via the Interstate Highway System.

 

For more information on this topic please contact Lester Taroff or Elliott Portman. 

 

 

 

Counsel
Linda D. Calder
Paula Wetstein