ÿWPCß{ RæiÕOñÀ£"ÎJv1`ëéßXoVÕð”v¢1‹NÓŠ#WöÝ£6UÎoÚ°>6™ í/ÍðäQH–ãBJÉ{ªswš pŽ ŽQ[<¡ÚFª\_Ë,ò¥æG£GðU9n˜ûÈñj)ʦZÐZ˜ &ë¥ËóE#œl¥™Ô¯ùÔkõ1–ê9ò·>lFz™‡Þq5¦ÔLCr8d†þMǫ̃m‡|S£Hû”¤²ÀÚ4ŽBÃV×X`Øíã`À"Äth†5š[š˜¯ÑÁ9Q·rBîyg´¾HF„²Í–]¤©+ fº E)Ø‹n㵪Ç×\p6ßáÛûv™M€H%b\¯ù A½ ¶îÜÙ;š«¢µ¡*9\K4}ÕF¯S—Å-Â@“ ›?ÂÎ…=ˆ@ÙµÚ=ÉÃCuƒŒÿ"ýRyèƒAHqÙÄþ“@rr;y„£\Ÿ–«C¡>*ï3ú{¢’Q#ÁnUN/ %} 0Yƒ 0DÜ 0 N6 UF8 UB~ ^ À 1uÌ 72A ws 4w ‹ š Eœ fž a  m´ NË U8Í U8 U@= N} 0c 1‡â Æi 0e/N”Æ–\\d 1‡gFî 1‡4±» Bl ê‰ ßs"bR& 1‡Z&rá& 1‡S*S* 1‡Ú*Ú* 1‡a+‚è+è+è+‰j. 1‡ó3ó3ó3©z4š#7 ½8 È< ÒC 1‡ïMïM†vNüRÕŒTQ aX«²b ]f‰}lÔq¿ÚwÚwÚwÚwÚwÚwÚwÚwUF™{˜HP LaserJet 5/5M - IPÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(1"$¡¡Ô€X XXXÔÔUSUS.,Ô(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(•Y2A|$¤¤Ý ƒ"!ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó <4šÛ 9Z+‹.Courier New Regular<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiµœ/0s 3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a) i)dO)0UDGES3|x1øÀTABLE AÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ<4šÛ 9Z+‹ Courier New <4šÛ 9Z+‹ Courier New (ÊÚE Z‹(Times New Roman (;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à(EhCEKQW]cioAutoList21.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.A, B,Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 54#*&2Quick A.ÚƒÚÚ  Ú.à0 àÛ€Ûa, b, c,Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5  ùÝ ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòSeeóó€òòalsoóó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòRobbinsóó€v.€òòRobbinsóó€(òòIn€re€Robbinsóó),€964€F.2dÐ ° Ð342,€346€(4th€Cir.€1992)€(noting€that€debtor„spouse's€separately„Ð †Ö Ðheld€property€becomes€part€of€bankrupt€estate;€non„debtor€spouseÐ \¬ Ðholds€an€unsecured€claim);€òòIn€re€Anjumóó,€288€B.R.€72,€76„77€(Ô_ÔBankrÔ_Ô.Ð 2‚ ÐÔ_ÔS.D.N.Y.Ô_Ô€2003)€(same,€collecting€cases);€òòIn€re€Lawrenceóó,€237€Ô_ÔB.R.Ô_ÔÐ X Ð61,€80„81€(Ô_ÔBankrÔ_Ô.€Ô_ÔD.N.J.Ô_Ô€1999);€òòIn€re€Ô_ÔAbmaÔ_Ôóó,€215€Ô_ÔB.R.Ô_Ô€148,€152Ð Þ. Ð(Ô_ÔBankrÔ_Ô.€N.D.€Ill.€1997);€òòIn€re€Palmeróó,€78€Ô_ÔB.R.Ô_Ô€402,€406€(Ô_ÔBankrÔ_Ô.Ð ´  ÐÔ_ÔE.D.N.Y.Ô_Ô€1987).(…hCEKQW]cioAutoList6I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I. <Ý ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€majority€heavily€relies€upon€such€cases€as€òòLongóó,€whichÐ ° Ðambiguously€advert€to€the€accrual€of€present€rights€in€the€maritalÐ †Ö Ðestate€"on€divorce."€€While€it€may€be€arguable€that€this€phraseÐ \¬ Ðwould€permit€an€interpretation€which€includes€the€time€period€fromÐ 2‚ Ðthe€filing€of€a€divorce€petition€to€the€entry€of€a€final€divorceÐ X Ðdecree,€the€much€more€plausible€and€natural€construction€is€thatÐ Þ. Ð"on€divorce"€refers€simply€to€the€time€commencing€with€the€entry€ofÐ ´  Ðthe€final€divorce€decree.€€Thus,€Davis€could€have€accrued€noÐ Š Ú Ðpresent€rights€in€the€Ô_ÔAdvestÔ_Ô€IRA€until€after€it€had€become€propertyÐ ` ° Ðof€the€Cox€bankrupt€estate.(•hCEKQW]cioAutoList7I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I. §Ý ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔDavis€has€already€invoked€an€important€state„law€legalÐ ° Ðremedy.€€Even€if€the€Advest€IRA€is€entirely€exempt€from€attachment,Ð †Ö Ðòòseeóó€Me.€Rev.€Stat.€Ann.€tit.€19„A,€ðð€903(5);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€Me.€Rev.Ð \¬ ÐStat.€Ann.€tit.€14,€ðð€4422(13)(F)€(limiting€IRA€exemption€to€amountÐ 2‚ Ð"reasonably€necessary€for€the€support€of€the€debtor"),€the€MaineÐ X Ðdivorce€statute€authorizes€the€divorce€court€to€factor€in€a€party'sÐ Þ. Ð"economic€misconduct"€in€apportioning€the€marital€property€(òòviz.óó,Ð ´  Ðwhen€effectively€setting€a€value€to€Davis's€unsecured€claim),€andÐ Š Ú Ðso€the€injunction€that€issues€when€spouses€file€a€petition€forÐ ` ° Ðdivorce€constituted€a€valuable€legal€remedy€to€Davis,€òòseeóó€Me.€Rev.Ð 6 †  ÐStat.€Ann.€tit.€19„A,€ðð€903(1).€€As€Cox€was€enjoined€fromÐ  \  Ðtransferring€the€Advest€IRA€funds€except€for€ordinary€and€necessaryÐ â 2  Ðpersonal€expenses,€and€Cox€violated€the€injunction,€Davis€couldÐ ¸  Ðhave€initiated€a€civil€contempt€proceeding€against€Cox,€orÐ ŽÞ  Ðrequested€the€divorce€court€to€adjust€the€property€settlement€toÐ d´  Ðcompensate€Davis€for€Coxððs€dissipation€of€the€IRA.€€She€elected€toÐ :Š  Ðavail€herself€of€the€latter€remedy.Ð `  Ð d àÝ ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔBased€upon€a€current€assessment€of€the€condition€of€theÐ ° Ðestate,€the€trustee€predicted€that€the€dividend€could€approximateÐ †Ö Ðten„percent,€which€would€result€in€a€$6,525€recovery€for€Davis. ÕÝ ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMoreover,€even€assuming€Davis€were€unable€to€prevail€underÐ ° Ððð€523(a)(15),€she€could€pursue€a€non„Ô_ÔdischargeabilityÔ_Ô€ruling€underÐ †Ö Ððð€523(a)(6)€(excepting€from€discharge€any€debt€"for€willful€andÐ \¬ Ðmalicious€injury€by€the€debtor"),€based€upon€Cox's€prior€violationsÐ 2‚ Ðof€the€divorce€court€injunction.€€òòSeeóó€òòÔ_ÔSiemerÔ_Ôóó€v.€òòÔ_ÔNangleÔ_Ôóó€(òòIn€reÐ X ÐÔ_ÔNangleÔ_Ôóó),€274€F.3d€481,€484€(8th€Cir.€2001)€(noting€that€contemptÐ Þ. Ðjudgments€may€be€excepted€from€discharge€under€ðð€523(a)(6)).- ù-(å£EGMSY_ekqAutoList111.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. hÝ ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOur€reluctance€is€increased€by€the€fact€that€any€such€broadÐ ° Ðpronouncement€as€to€Maine€law€could€have€unforseen€effects€on€MaineÐ †Ö Ðcreditors'€rights€law€in€factual€circumstances€quite€different€fromÐ \¬ Ðthe€present.€€Any€such€interpretationÔf  ÔÔg ÔÔf  ÔÔV  ÔÔg ÔÔf  ÔÔWDÔ€of€Maine€law,€evenÐ 2‚ Ðprovisionally,€should€be€left€to€the€Supreme€Judicial€Court€ofÐ X ÐMaine€upon€certification€or€otherwise€rather€than€attempted€by€aÐ Þ. Ðfederal€court.Ð ´  Ð(ú½CEKQW]cioAutoList8A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.( ¾CEKQW]cioAutoList9A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.(*ùEGMSY_ekqAutoList10A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A. Ô 9+ ' Turner0Turner .    Ý ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòWhiteóó€v.€òòBellóó€(òòIn€re€White)óó,€212€B.R.€979,€983Ð ° Ð(B.A.P.€10th€Cir.€1997)€("Thus,€where€the€divorce€is€pending€whenÐ †Ö Ðthe€bankruptcy€petition€is€filed,€the€divorcing€spouses'€respectiveÐ \¬ Ðproperty€interest€are€vested€but€subject€to€subsequentÐ 2‚ Ðdefinition.");€òòIn€re€Greeróó,€242€B.R.€389,€396€(Bankr.€N.D.€OhioÐ X Ð1999)€(finding€that€"it€was€the€intention€under€Ohio€law€to€conferÐ Þ. Ðupon€a€spouse€an€interest€in€any€property€that€is€or€would€qualifyÐ ´  Ðas€'marital€property'€regardless€of€whether€such€property€wasÐ Š Ú Ðseparately€titled.");€òòóóòòÔ_ÔRobergeÔ_Ôóó,€188€Ô_ÔB.R.Ô_Ô€at€369€("Once€a€[divorceÐ ` ° Ðaction€is€filed]€the€right€to€equitable€distribution€vests€[and]Ð 6 †  Ðthe€parties€to€the€divorce€obtain€inchoate€equitable€interests€inÐ  \  Ðthe€marital€estate€equivalent€to€the€shares€to€which€they€areÐ â 2  Ðentitled€under€equitable€distribution.").(¤EGMSY_ekqAutoList131.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. ŸÝ ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔCox€also€maintained€another€IRA€at€Fleet€Bank€valued€atÐ ° Ðapproximately€$1,500.€€Davis€sent€a€letter€to€Fleet€Bank€advisingÐ †Ö Ðit€of€the€divorce€proceedings.€€The€Fleet€Bank€IRA€is€not€at€issueÐ \¬ Ðin€this€appeal.Ð 2‚ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àà  àà x à Ý ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔBy€the€time€the€divorce€decree€was€issued,€the€IRA's€valueÐ ° Ðhad€risen€to€approximately€$90,000.€Ô€X®DXXX®DÔ Ý ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAs€previously€noted,€while€Maine's€own€attachment€statute€andÐ ° Ðultimately€the€bankruptcy€statute€exempt€property€reasonablyÐ †Ö Ðnecessary€for€the€owner's€support,€the€Maine€divorce€court'sÐ \¬ Ðproperty€division,€made€after€a€lengthy€trial,€reflects€the€state's€Ð 2‚ Ðmost€complete€and€sensitive€reading€of€the€equities€as€between€CoxÐ X Ðand€Davis,€including€Cox's€appropriate€needs.€€That€decision,Ð Þ. Ðrather€than€the€narrower€rule€set€out€in€Me.€Rev.€Stat.€Ann.€Tit.Ð ´  Ð14,€ðð€4422(13)(E)€is€the€proper€guide€to€Maine€law€here,€and€theÐ Š Ú Ðone€to€which€Maine's€courts€would€give€effect€in€the€presentÐ ` ° Ðcircumstances. Ý ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔUnder€11€U.S.C.€ðð€522,€a€debtor€is€allowed€to€declare€certainÐ ° Ðproperty€as€exempt€from€the€bankruptcy€estate.€€Once€an€exemptionÐ †Ö Ðbecomes€effective,€the€exempt€property€is€generally€not€liable€forÐ \¬  Ðany€debt€of€the€debtor€that€arose€pre„petition.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€€at€ððÐ ° Ð522(c).€€A€debtor€may€choose€to€claim€the€exemptions€listed€in€ððÐ †Ö Ð522(d)€or€those€provided€for€under€state€law.€€Cox€followed€theÐ \¬ Ðlatter€route,€€claiming€exemption€for€the€Advest€IRA€under€titleÐ 2‚ Ð14,€section€4422(13)(E)€of€Maine€law.€€As€applicable€to€this€case,Ð X Ðsection€4422(13)(E)€exempts€from€attachment€an€"individualÐ Þ. Ðretirement€account€...to€the€extent€reasonably€necessary€for€theÐ ´  Ðsupport€of€the€debtor€and€any€dependent€of€the€debtor."€€òòId.óó€Ð Š Ú ÐSection€4422(13)€was€amended€by€2001€Me.€Laws€c.€306,€ðððð€1„5Ð ` ° Ðeffective€September€21,€2001.€€It€does€not€appear,€however,€thatÐ 6 †  Ðthis€amendment€applies€here.€€òòSeeóó€òòSteelstone€Industries,€Inc.óó€v.Ð  \  ÐòòMcCrumóó,€785€A.2d€1256,€1258,€n.3€(2001)€(concluding€that€amendmentÐ â 2  Ðdid€not€apply€although€it€became€effective€during€pendency€ofÐ ¸  Ðlitigation).€€Even€were€the€amendment€applicable,€its€languageÐ ŽÞ  Ðwould€not€alter€the€exempt€status€of€the€Advest€IRA.  Ý ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAs€indicated€in€note€4,€òòsupraóó,€inclusion€of€the€Advest€IRA€inÐ ° Ðthe€bankruptcy€estate€would€not€mean€the€IRA€will€go€to€Cox'sÐ †Ö Ðcreditors.€€By€the€parties'€stipulation,€the€Advest€IRA€is€exemptÐ \¬ Ðfrom€€Cox's€creditors,€being€needed€for€his€support€and€that€of€hisÐ 2‚ Ðdependents.€òòSeeóó€n.4,€òòsupraóó.€€As€a€result,€Cox€himself€will€retainÐ X Ðthe€IRA€notwithstanding€his€bankruptcy.€€The€bankruptcy€courtÐ Þ. Ðcommented€that€"as€the€record€presently€appears,€it€seems€unlikelyÐ ´  Ðthat€[Mr.€Cox's]€attempt€to€exempt€the€IRA€funds€will€fail."€€òòCoxóó,Ð Š Ú Ð274€B.R.€at€31.€€As€a€result,€the€Maine€divorce€court's€authorityÐ ` ° Ðto€make€an€equitable€division€as€between€the€spouses,€and€inÐ 6 †  Ðparticular€to€award€the€lion's€share€of€the€IRA€to€Davis€inÐ  \  Ðreparation€for€Cox's€contempt€of€the€court's€preliminaryÐ â 2  Ðinjunction,€will€be€thwarted.€€Neither€Cox's€creditors€nor€DavisÐ ¸  Ðwill€have€access€to€the€IRA.€€According€to€the€bankruptcy€court,Ð ŽÞ  ÐDavis€is€left€with€a€general€unsecured€claim€for€$65,250€againstÐ d´  Ðher€former€husband's€bankruptcy€estate,€without€recourse€againstÐ :Š  Ðthe€IRA€account.€€òòBut€seeóó€òòIn€re€Perryóó,€131€B.R.€763,€767€(Bankr.€D.Ð `  ÐMass.€1991)€(concluding€that€right€to€equitable€distribution€underÐ æ6 ÐMassachusetts€divorce€statute€not€a€"claim"€in€bankruptcy).€€WhileÐ ¼  ÐCox€will€thus€retain€the€IRA,€the€bankruptcy€court€will€still€haveÐ ’â Ðunder€advisement€the€question€whether€Davis's€$65,250€claim€isÐ h¸ Ðnondischargeable€in€bankruptcy,€òòseeóó€11€U.S.C.€ðð€523(a)(6)€and€(15),Ð >Ž Ðpermitting€her€to€pursue€Cox€even€after€his€discharge€inÐ d Ðbankruptcy.€€Cox's€abject€financial€position,€however,€suggestsÐ ê: Ðthat€nondischargeability€may€be€difficult€to€obtain,€òòid.óó,€and,€evenÐ À Ðif€obtained,€will€likely€be€a€fruitless€remedy.€€The€same€can€beÐ –æ Ðsaid€as€to€Cox's€claim€against€the€bankruptcy€estate.€€Ð l¼ Ð(¤EGMSY_ekqAutoList141.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. |Ý ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Maine€statute€directs€the€court€to€look€at€three€factors:Ð ° Ð(1)€the€contribution€of€each€spouse€to€the€acquisition€of€theÐ †Ö Ðmarital€property,€including€the€contribution€of€a€spouse€asÐ \¬ Ðhomemaker;€(2)€the€value€of€the€property€set€apart€to€each€spouse;Ð 2‚ Ðand€(3)€the€economic€circumstances€of€each€spouse€at€the€time€theÐ X Ðdivision€of€property€is€to€become€effective.€€òòId.óó€at€ðð€953(1).€Ð Þ. ÐWhen€dividing€marital€property,€courts€have€also€taken€into€accountÐ ´  Ða€spouse's€"economic€misconduct"€during€the€pendency€of€divorceÐ Š Ú Ðproceedings,€specifically€the€unauthorized€diminution€of€maritalÐ ` ° Ðproperty.€€òòSeeóóòòWilliamsóó€v.€òòWilliamsóó,€706€A.2d€1038,€1040€(Me.Ð 6 †  Ð1998).Ð  \  Ð †Ý ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€so€stating€we€do€not€mean€to€indicate€our€view€on€thisÐ ° Ðseparate€issue€one€way€or€the€other.Ð †Ö Ð ËÝ ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔOf€the€$36,000€in€the€Lawrason€Account,€$10,850€was€set€asideÐ ° Ðto€pay€taxes€on€the€premature€withdrawals€from€the€Advest€IRA,Ð †Ö Ð$10,210€was€earmarked€to€pay€state€and€federal€income€taxes€fromÐ \¬ Ð1985€and€1986,€and€the€balance€was€to€be€applied€to€the€parties'Ð 2‚ Ðjoint€debt€to€Key€Bank.€€Of€the€$8,400€in€the€Ridge€Account,€$6,600Ð X Ðrepresented€retroactive€SSDI€payments€paid€to€Davis€on€behalf€ofÐ Þ. Ðthe€children€and€was€awarded€to€Davis€for€that€purpose,€the€balanceÐ ´  Ðof€the€escrow€account,€$1,800,€was€also€to€be€applied€toward€theÐ Š Ú ÐKey€Bank€debt.Ð ` ° Ð G Ý ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔDavis€argues€on€appeal€that€Cox€does€not€have€standing€toÐ ° Ðappeal€the€bankruptcy€court's€judgment€regarding€the€escrowÐ †Ö  Ðaccounts.€€The€bankruptcy€court€addressed€whether€Cox€had€standingÐ ° Ðto€oppose€the€implementation€of€the€divorce€decree€as€it€pertainedÐ †Ö Ðto€the€escrow€accounts€and€stated€it€was€"unconvinced€that€CoxÐ \¬ ÐÔ_Ôha[dÔ_Ô]€independent€standing."€€It€did€not€make€a€final€determinationÐ 2‚ Ðon€this€issue,€however,€because€the€trustee€had€standing€to€opposeÐ X Ðthe€divorce€judgment's€disposition€of€the€escrow€accounts.€€UnderÐ Þ. Ðthe€Bankruptcy€Code,€standing€to€appeal€from€a€final€bankruptcyÐ ´  Ðorder€is€accorded€only€to€a€"person€aggrieved"€by€the€decision.€Ð Š Ú ÐòòÔ_ÔSpenlinhauerÔ_Ôóó€v.€òòO'Donnellóó,€261€F.3d€113,€117„18€(1st€Cir.€2001).€Ð ` ° ÐA€"person€aggrieved"€is€one€whose€pecuniary€interests€are€directlyÐ 6 †  Ðand€adversely€affected€by€the€order.€€òòId.óó€at€118.€€Cox€argues€thatÐ  \  Ðhe€has€a€direct€pecuniary€interest€in€the€outcome€of€the€appealÐ â 2  Ðbecause€the€majority€of€the€funds€held€in€escrow€are€exempt€assetsÐ ¸  Ðand€thus€would€pass€out€of€the€bankruptcy€estate€and€into€hisÐ ŽÞ  Ðhands.€€This€theory€is€viable€only€if€the€allegedly€exempt€assetsÐ d´  Ðwere€Cox's€property€at€the€time€the€petition€was€filed€and€thusÐ :Š  Ðbecame€property€of€the€estate.€€The€standing€issue€and€theÐ `  Ðsubstantive€issue€of€what,€if€any,€interest€Cox€had€in€the€Ô_ÔescrowedÔ_ÔÐ æ6 Ðfunds€at€the€commencement€of€the€bankruptcy€case€are€closelyÐ ¼  Ðintertwined.€€If€Cox€does€not€have€an€interest€in€the€Ô_ÔescrowedÔ_ÔÐ ’â Ðfunds€then€it€is€unlikely€that€he€has€standing€to€challenge€theÐ h¸ Ðorder€disposing€of€those€funds.€€Thus,€whether€we€address€theÐ >Ž Ðmerits€or€the€standing€issue,€we€must€examine€what€interest€Cox€hadÐ d Ðin€the€Ô_ÔescrowedÔ_Ô€funds€at€the€commencement€of€his€bankruptcy.Ð ê: Ð ¡Ý ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔMoreover,€while€in€òòcustodiaóó€òòlegisóó,€the€property€is€notÐ ° Ðsubject€to€levy€or€attachment€in€any€form.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòHardyóó,€68Ð †Ö ÐMe.€at€195.€€As€a€result,€the€trustee,€as€a€hypothetical€lienÐ \¬ Ðcreditor,€cannot€recover€the€property€for€the€estate.€€11€U.S.C.€ððÐ 2‚ Ð544.€€In€any€event,€the€trustee€in€this€case€did€not€attempt€toÐ X Ðavoid€any€interest€that€was€transferred€to€the€custodian€pursuantÐ Þ. Ðto€the€state€court€order€nor€did€the€trustee€request€the€turnoverÐ ´   Ðof€the€property€pursuant€to€ðð€543.Ð ° Ð Ý ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔòòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòPerlowóó€v.€òòPerlowóó,€128€B.R.€412,€415€(E.D.N.C.Ð ° Ð1991)€(finding€ðð€544€cut„off€spouse's€right€because€under€NorthÐ †Ö ÐCarolina€law€a€judgment€creditor's€rights€are€superior€to€a€spousesÐ \¬ Ðbecause€the€filing€of€divorce€does€not€create€a€lien€on€specificÐ 2‚ Ðmarital€property€in€favor€of€the€spouse);€òòLawrenceóó€v.€òòLawrenceóó,€237Ð X ÐB.R.€61,€78„79€(Bankr.€D.N.J.€1999)€(finding€ðð€544€cut„off€spouse'sÐ Þ. Ðright€because€under€New€Jersey€law€a€judgment€creditor's€rights€areÐ ´  Ðsuperior€to€a€spouse's€if€the€lien€was€obtained€prior€to€divorceÐ Š Ú Ðjudgment);€òòAndersonóó€v.€òòBriglevichóó€(òòIn€re€Andersonóó),€147€B.R.€1015,Ð ` ° Ð1022€(Bankr.€N.D.€Ga.€1992)€(concluding€that€non„debtor'sÐ 6 †  Ðunrecorded€equitable€interest€in€marital€property€cut„off€byÐ  \  Ðtrustee's€strong€arm€powers);€òòIn€re€Vannóó,€113€B.R.€704,€706€(Bankr.Ð â 2  ÐD.€Colo.€1990)€(stating€that€until€a€spouse€takes€affirmativeÐ ¸  Ðaction€to€perfect€her€interest€in€marital€property€the€trustee'sÐ ŽÞ  Ðrights€are€superior€under€ðð€544).€€Ð d´  Ð Ý ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWhile€there€is€significant€support€along€these€lines€for€non„Ð ° Ðdebtor€spouses€in€situations€like€the€present,€such€support€is€byÐ †Ö Ðno€means€universal.€€Many€other€courts€have€embraced€a€rationaleÐ \¬ Ðsimilar€to€that€of€the€bankruptcy€court€here.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòÔ_ÔAnjumÔ_Ôóó€v.Ð 2‚ ÐòòÔ_ÔAnjumÔ_Ôóó,€288€Ô_ÔB.R.Ô_Ô€72,€76€(Ô_ÔBankrÔ_Ô.€Ô_ÔS.D.N.Y.Ô_Ô€2003);€òòLawrenceóó€v.Ð X ÐòòLawrenceóó,€237€Ô_ÔB.R.Ô_Ô€61,€79€(Ô_ÔBankrÔ_Ô.€D.€N.J.€1999);€òòIn€re€Coleóó,€202Ð Þ. ÐÔ_ÔB.R.Ô_Ô€356,€360€(Ô_ÔBankrÔ_Ô.€Ô_ÔS.D.N.Y.Ô_Ô€1996). ÊÝ ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€court€found€that€"[Ô_Ôb]othÔ_Ô€parties€contributed€to€theÐ ° Ðacquisition€of€the€marital€property,€Defendant€through€hisÐ †Ö Ðsuccessful€law€practice€and€Plaintiff€through€her€employmentÐ \¬ Ðoutside€the€home€as€well€as€her€contribution€as€a€homemaker."€Ð 2‚ ÐFurther€noting€that€the€court€"has€also€given€careful€considerationÐ X Ðto€the€parties'€respective€economic€circumstances€at€this€time,"Ð Þ. Ðthe€court€awarded€the€Peaks€Island€residence€to€Davis,€and€aÐ ´  Ðsubstantial€payment€from€his€law€firm€to€Cox.€€Cox€was€also€givenÐ Š Ú Ðother€real€estate.€€The€court€noted€Cox's€contention€that€he€neededÐ ` ° Ðthe€marital€cash€assets€to€pay€bills€and€current€expenses,Ð 6 †  Ðincluding€psychiatry€not€covered€by€insurance.€Ð  \  Ðà  àThe€court€said€that€its€property€disposition€"meets€some€ofÐ â 2  Ðthat€need€while€providing€funds€for€payment€of€the€parties'€jointÐ ¸  Ðtax€liabilities€and€other€joint€debt."€€Ð ŽÞ  Ðà  àThe€court€declined€Davis's€request€that€Cox€be€ordered€to€payÐ d´  Ðher€lump€sum€alimony,€finding€that€because€of€Cox's€disability€andÐ :Š  Ðpresent€economic€circumstances,€he€lacked€the€ability€to€pay€lumpÐ `  Ðsum€Ô_ÔspousalÔ_Ô€support. µÝ ƒA|$ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÓ  ÓÓ=€ë,X‚ÐXdÐd=Óà  àÓÓÔ€X®DXXX®DÔòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWhile€one€possible€reading€ofÔV  Ô€Ôf  ÔÔWÔÔg Ôthe€òòLongóó€court's€"on€divorce"Ð ° Ðphraseology€Ôf  ÔcouldÔg ÔÔf  ÔÔV  ÔÔg ÔÔf  ÔÔW¶Ô€beÔf  Ô€Ôg Ôthat€a€non„owner€spouse's€interest€only€arisesÐ †Ö  Ðupon€the€issuance€of€the€final€judgment€granting€divorce€andÐ ° Ðdividing€the€property,€the€other€cited€decisions€of€the€MaineÐ †Ö ÐSupreme€Judicial€Court€use€broader€language€leaving€open€preciselyÐ \¬ Ðwhen€and€how€the€partnership€rights€are€to€be€implemented€onceÐ 2‚ Ðdivorce€proceedings€are€underway..Courier New RegularÝ ƒ"!ÝÔ€X®DXXXÔÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ ÔÑTRY,3Ø'Xà3Ø' Letter 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÑ ? ÑÙ*ƒüœ!Ùò òÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÔ‡°d<°XX®DÔÔ‡°Üʰ°°d<ÔUnited€States€Court€of€AppealsÔ#†Xë,X°°ÜÊö#ÔÔ‡„m³ „XXë,ÔÐ ° ÐFor€the€First€CircuitÔ#†„ „ „„m³#Ôó óÔ#†X®DX „„u#ÔÐ „Ô ÐÓêÓÌÌßA€') °°` dE< ` AßÐ  à ÐÌÌNos.€02„1962,€02„1963Ð K › Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àÌà@| | ìàLAURIE€DAVIS€a/k/a€LAURIE€DAVIS€COX,ˆÐ ÷ G  ÐÌà@Ô Ô ìàAppellant,€Cross„Appellee,ˆÐ £ó  ÐÌà@tt)ìàv.ˆÐ OŸ  ÐÌà@XX%ìàTHOMAS€COX,ˆÐ ûK  ÐÌà@0 0 ìàDebtor„Appellee,€Cross„Appellant.ˆÐ §÷ ÐÌßA€') °°` dE<R` AßÐ S£ ÐÌÓ  Óà@@ìì*ìàCROSS„APPEALS€FROM€THE€UNITED€STATES€DISTRICT€COURTÐ 8ˆ ÐFOR€THE€DISTRICT€OF€MAINEÐ ^ ÐÌà@@œ œ ìà[Hon.€George€Z.€Singal,€òòU.S.€District€Judgeóó]Ð º  ÐÌßA€') °°` dE<e` AßÐ f¶ ÐÌà@@„„'ìàBeforeÐ K› ÐÌà@@((ìà€Howard,€òòCircuit€Judgeóó,Ð ÷G ÐÌCampbell€and€Cyr,€òòSenior€Circuit€Judgesóó.Ð £ó  ÐÌÌßA€') °°` dE<$!` AßÐ %!u# ÐÌÓ  ÓÓ  Óà  àòòMichael€J.€Pearceóó€with€whom€òòJoshua€R.€Dowóó€and€òòMichael€J.Ð  "Z% ÐPearce€&€Associates,€LLCóó€were€on€brief€for€appellant,€cross„Ð à"0& Ðappellee.Ð ¶#' Ðà  àòòGeorge€J.€Marcusóó€and€òòRegan€M.€Hornneyóó€with€whom€òòJennie€L.Ð Œ$Ü( ÐCleggóó€and€òòMarcus,€Clegg€&€Mistretta,€P.A.óó€were€on€brief€for€cross„Ð b%² ) Ðappellant,€debtor„appellee.Ð 8&ˆ!* ÐÌÌÔ*‹ƒ'ddd Xdd Xdd X°(#°(#‹ÔÔ,( dd ÔÔ,( dd ÔÔ,( dd ÔÔ+  ÔÐ º( $-º( $ ‹‹ÐÓÞÓÐ SI)n$. Žâ@38000„„‰Žâ@‰‹‹SÐÌJanuary€15,€2004Ð ô)D%0 ÐÐ RHCÊ*&1" Žâ@38000 Žâ@ ‹‹RÐÐ()n$2  (ÐÓ  ÓÙ* !ÙÌÌÓ  ÓÐ  |-Ì(4? ÐÒe°ÒÑ  ÑÓÓÑ8€ ®D XXdÖdÈ8ÑÑ€*ÑÓ*°,X°` ¨ ƒX°œX*Óà ` àò òCAMPBELL,€òòSenior€Circuit€Judgeóó.ó ó€€These€appeals€challengeÐ ° Ðthe€bankruptcy€court's€resolution€of€an€issue€at€the€intersectionÐ xÈ Ðof€federal€bankruptcy€and€Maine€family€law.€€Ð $t Ðà ` àSometime€after€his€wife,€appellant€Laurie€Davis,€had€suedÐ Ð  Ðhim€for€divorce€in€the€Maine€state€district€court,€Thomas€Cox,€theÐ | Ì Ðcross„appellant,€filed€for€bankruptcy€in€the€United€StatesÐ ( x  ÐBankruptcy€Court€for€the€District€of€Maine.€€Subsequently€the€stateÐ Ô$  Ðcourt€allowed€the€divorce€and€divided€the€couple's€marital€property.€Ð €Ð  ÐAs€one€part€of€the€property€disposition,€the€court€awarded€to€Davis€Ð ,|  Ðmost€of€an€Individual€Retirement€Account€("the€Advest€IRA")€ownedÐ Ø( Ðby€Cox.€€The€court€also€directed€that€sums€being€held€in€escrowÐ „Ô Ðpursuant€to€its€prior€order€be€used€to€pay€the€couple's€taxes€andÐ 0€ Ðother€debts.€€Ð Ü, Ðà ` àDavis€then€sought€permission€from€the€bankruptcy€court€Ð ˆØ Ðto€execute€the€divorce€court's€division€of€the€marital€property.€Ð 4„ ÐThe€bankruptcy€court,€however,€refused€to€let€Davis€recover€againstÐ à0 Ðthe€Advest€IRA.€€It€ruled€that€because€the€Advest€IRA€was€in€Cox'sÐ ŒÜ  Ðname€when€Cox€petitioned€for€bankruptcy,€it€became€the€property€ofÐ 8!ˆ" Ðhis€bankruptcy€estate,€hence€was€not€subject€to€the€later€judgmentÐ ä"4$ Ðof€the€divorce€court.€€Instead,€the€divorce€court's€dispositionÐ $à& Ðrelative€to€the€IRA€gave€Davis€merely€a€general€unsecured€claim€forÐ <&Œ!( Ðthe€relevant€amount€against€the€bankruptcy€estate.€€Regarding€theÐ è'8#* Ðsums€held€in€escrow,€the€bankruptcy€court€ruled€that€these€could€beÐ ”)ä$, Ðdisbursed€according€to€the€divorce€judgment.€€The€bankruptcy€courtÐ @+&. Ðconcluded€that€the€state€court's€order€placing€the€funds€in€escrowÐ ° Ðhad€acted€as€a€lien,€effective€at€the€time€of€bankruptcy,€againstÐ \¬ Ðthose€funds.Ð X Ðà ` àDavis€and€Cox€both€appeal€from€these€orders€of€theÐ ´  Ðbankruptcy€court.€€While€we€affirm€the€bankruptcy€court's€decisionÐ ` ° Ðon€the€escrow€property,€we€reverse€the€court's€decision€as€to€theÐ  \  ÐAdvest€IRA€and€remand€for€further€proceedings€consistent€with€thisÐ ¸  Ðopinion.€€Ð d´  ÐÓ€ %(•h83 ÓÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýò òÝ‚3£\ÝÔ2•hÔÚ  ÚIÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0 ` àÝ  ÝBACKGROUNDó ó݃3£\ŒÝŒÐ` ` (#` (# ÐŒÝ  Ýà ` àLaurie€Davis€and€Thomas€Cox€were€married€on€August€17,Ð Ø( Ð1985.€€They€have€two€minor€children,€ages€14€and€12.€€After€theÐ „Ô Ðmarriage,€Davis€was€a€homemaker€and,€for€sometime,€Cox€was€aÐ 0€ Ðsuccessful€commercial€attorney.€€Since€1997,€however,€Cox€has€beenÐ Ü, Ðclassified€as€totally€disabled€with€bipolar€disorder.€€Ð ˆØ Ðà ` àOn€November€4,€1998,€Davis€filed€for€divorce€in€Maine'sÐ 4„ Ðstate€district€court.€€Upon€commencement€of€the€divorce€action,€theÐ à0 Ðcourt€was€required€by€Maine€law€to€issue,€and€did€issue,€aÐ ŒÜ  Ðpreliminary€injunction€enjoining€either€spouse€from€"transferring,Ð 8!ˆ" Ðencumbering,€concealing,€selling€or€otherwise€disposing€of€propertyÐ ä"4$ Ðof€either€or€both€of€the€parties,€except€in€the€usual€course€ofÐ $à& Ðbusiness€or€for€the€necessities€of€life."€€Me.€Rev.€Stat.€Ann.€tit.€Ð <&Œ!( Ð19„A,€ðð€903(1)(B)(1)(2000).€€The€preliminary€injunction€was€meantÐ è'8#* Ðto€keep€intact,€until€ultimate€division€by€the€court,€the€divorcingÐ ”)ä$, Ðcouple's€"marital€property,"€a€term€Maine€law€describes€as€includingÐ @+&. Ð(with€certain€exceptions)€all€property€acquired€by€either€partyÐ ° Ðsubsequent€to€the€marriage€„„€property€that,€upon€divorce,€isÐ \¬ Ðequitably€divided€by€the€court€between€the€divorcing€pairÐ X Ðirrespective€of€in€whose€name€it€was€€held.€€òòId.óó€at€ðð€953(3).€€DavisÐ ´  Ðalso€filed€a€notice€of€lis€pendens€in€the€Cumberland€County€RegistryÐ ` ° Ðof€Deeds€giving€notice€of€the€pending€divorce€relative€to€any€realÐ  \  Ðestate€transactions.€€òòId.óó€at€ðð€953(6).€€In€addition,€Davis€sent€aÐ ¸  Ðletter€to€Advest,€the€entity€maintaining€an€individual€retirementÐ d´  Ðaccount€held€in€Cox's€name,€advising€it€of€the€pending€divorce€andÐ `  Ðthe€preliminary€injunction.׃9×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€Advest€IRA,€valued€atÐ ¼  Ðapproximately€$65,000€at€the€commencement€of€the€divorceÐ h¸ Ðproceeding,׃:¾×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€was€titled€in€Cox's€name€only.€€Ð d Ðà ` àDespite€the€preliminary€injunction,€Cox€withdrew€fundsÐ À Ðfrom€the€Advest€IRA€and€disposed€of€other€marital€assets€inÐ l¼ Ðviolation€of€the€restrictions€contained€in€the€injunction.€€WhenÐ h ÐDavis€brought€Cox's€conduct€to€the€divorce€court's€attention,€itÐ Ä Ðentered€an€interim€order€on€May€24,€1999,€providing€among€otherÐ pÀ  Ðthings€that€"neither€party€may€draw€down€funds€from€the€IRA's€orÐ !l" Ðfrom€other€liquid€or€semi„liquid€assets,€whether€or€notÐ È"$ Ðcharacterized€as€for€the€necessities€of€life,€without€either€priorÐ ° Ðwritten€approval€from€the€other€party€or€order€of€the€court."€€CoxÐ \¬ Ðignored€this€order€also€and€continued€to€make€withdrawals€from€theÐ X ÐIRA€without€Davis's€prior€approval€or€the€court's€order.Ð ´  Ðà ` àTo€avoid€further€dissipation€of€the€marital€assets,€theÐ ` ° ÐMaine€district€court€also€ordered€the€parties'€attorneys,€MartinÐ  \  ÐRidge€and€Pamela€Lawrason,€to€hold€in€escrow€with€their€respectiveÐ ¸  Ðfirms€certain€funds€belonging€to€Cox€and€Davis.€€Those€funds€wereÐ d´  Ðnot€to€be€moved,€used,€or€transferred€absent€a€court€order.€€Ms.€Ð `  ÐLawrason€placed€the€funds€in€a€separate€interest€bearing€accountÐ ¼  Ð("Lawrason€Account")€and€Mr.€Ridge€held€the€funds€in€his€firm'sÐ h¸ Ðtrust€account€("Ridge€Account").Ð d Ðà ` àAfter€several€unsuccessful€attempts€at€an€agreedÐ À Ðsettlement,€the€parties€requested€the€Maine€district€court€to€divideÐ l¼ Ðthe€marital€property.€€òòId.óó€at€ðð€953(4).€€Pursuant€to€Maine€statute,Ð h Ðthe€court€is€empowered€to€"set€apart€to€each€spouse€the€spouse'sÐ Ä Ðproperty€and€shall€divide€the€marital€property€in€proportions€theÐ pÀ  Ðcourt€considers€just€after€considering€all€relevant€factors."€€òòId.€óóÐ !l" Ðat€ðð€953(1).Ð È"$ Ðà ` àThe€divorce€action€was€initially€set€for€trial€onÐ t$Ä& ÐFebruary€28,€2000,€but€trial€was€postponed€when€Cox€informed€theÐ  &p!( Ðcourt€that€he€was€filing€a€bankruptcy€petition€later€that€day.€€WhenÐ Ì'#* Ðthe€bankruptcy€petition€was€not€filed,€the€Maine€district€courtÐ x)È$, Ðrescheduled€the€trial€for€April€5,€2000.€€The€trial€was€delayedÐ $+t&. Ðagain,€however,€when,€on€that€date,€Cox€filed€with€United€StatesÐ ° ÐBankruptcy€Court€for€the€District€of€Maine€a€petition€for€bankruptcyÐ \¬ Ðunder€Chapter€13€of€the€Bankruptcy€Code.€€11€U.S.C.€ðð€301€(2000).€Ð X ÐA€stay€under€11€U.S.C.€ðð€362€automatically€went€into€effect€at€thisÐ ´  Ðtime€preventing€the€state€court€from€proceeding€with€the€trial.€€ButÐ ` ° Ðon€June€1,€2000,€the€bankruptcy€court€in€response€to€Davis's€motion,Ð  \  Ðrelieved€her€from€the€automatic€stay€to€the€extent€necessary€for€herÐ ¸  Ðto€continue€with€the€divorce€in€state€court.€€In€its€order,€theÐ d´  Ðbankruptcy€court€noted€that€the€state€court€divorce€action€wasÐ `  Ðvirtually€ready€to€be€tried,€that€it€involved€state€law€issues€asÐ ¼  Ðto€which€the€state€court€has€special€and€everyday€expertise€notÐ h¸ Ðrequiring€the€expertise€of€the€bankruptcy€court,€and€that€the€estateÐ d Ðand€creditors€were€protected€by€Trustee€Fessenden's€appearance€inÐ À Ðthe€divorce€action.€€The€court€further€stated€that€relief€from€stayÐ l¼ Ðwas€not€granted€to€implement€any€property€settlement€issues€absentÐ h Ðits€further€order.Ð Ä Ðà ` àFessenden,€the€trustee€for€the€bankruptcy€estate,€filedÐ pÀ  Ða€memorandum€in€the€divorce€proceeding€setting€forth€"the€trustee'sÐ !l" Ðposition€on€the€bankruptcy€issues€in€the€pending€divorce."€€TheÐ È"$ Ðtrustee's€position€was€not€unlike€that€now€asserted€by€Davis,€thatÐ t$Ä& Ðthe€Maine€district€court€would€determine€the€ownership€rights€of€theÐ  &p!( Ðmarital€property€pursuant€to€state€law€and€the€state€court'sÐ Ì'#* Ðdisposition€of€the€property€would€establish€what€is€"property€of€theÐ x)È$, Ðdebtor"€and€define€the€bankruptcy€estate.€€The€trustee€recognized,Ð $+t&. Ðhowever,€that€Maine€law€was€unsettled€"whether€the€eventual€divorceÐ ° Ðjudgment€òòcreatesóó€property€rights€or€òòdeclaresóó€those€rights€whichÐ \¬ Ðarose€as€of€the€filing€of€the€divorce."€€(Emphasis€in€the€original).€Ð X ÐAs€a€result,€the€trustee€urged€the€state€court€"to€take€thisÐ ´  Ðopportunity€to€address€the€fundamental€issues€of€when€divorcingÐ ` ° Ðparties'€property€rights€arise€as€a€matter€of€state€law"€andÐ  \  Ðencouraged€the€court,€if€it€needed€guidance,€to€certify€the€questionÐ ¸  Ðto€the€Supreme€Judicial€Court€of€Maine.€€The€court€held€a€four„dayÐ d´  Ðtrial€largely€dealing€with€what€disposition€to€make€of€maritalÐ `  Ðassets€and€debt.€€After€the€trial,€but€before€the€court's€judgmentÐ ¼  Ðwas€issued,€Cox,€on€October€30,€2000,€converted€his€Chapter€13Ð h¸ Ðpetition€to€a€Chapter€7€liquidation.€€Ð d Ðà ` àOn€November€21,€2000,€the€Maine€district€court€enteredÐ À Ðits€judgment.€€It€granted€the€divorce,€awarded€parental€rights€toÐ l¼ ÐDavis,€and€made€detailed€orders€concerning€care€of€the€children.€Ð h ÐRegarding€disposition€of€the€couple's€property,€the€court€òòinteróó€òòaliaóóÐ Ä Ðfound€that€the€Advest€IRA€account,€by€then€valued€at€$90,000,€wasÐ pÀ  Ða€part€of€the€couple's€marital€property.€€The€court€ordered€thatÐ !l" Ð$10,500€of€the€Advest€IRA€be€paid€for€guardian€ad€litem€fees€amassedÐ È"$ Ðduring€the€divorce€proceedings.€€It€found€it€equitable€to€awardÐ t$Ä& Ð$65,250€from€the€Advest€IRA€account€to€Davis,€holding€that€Cox€"wasÐ  &p!( Ðin€contempt€for€violation€of€the€preliminary€injunction"€and€thatÐ Ì'#* Ð$65,250€was€a€proper€"sanction"€for€the€contempt.€€The€court€statedÐ x)È$, Ðthat€that€sum€"restores€Plaintiff€to€the€position€she€would€haveÐ $+t&. Ðenjoyed€had€Defendant€not€put€these€funds€to€his€own€use."€€InÐ ° Ðmaking€that€and€the€other€property€dispositions€in€the€divorceÐ \¬ Ðjudgment,€the€court€recited€that€it€had€considered€the€factors€setÐ X Ðforth€in€title€19„A,€ðð€953€of€the€Maine€Revised€Statutes€and€foundÐ ´  Ðthe€dispositions€to€be€equitable.׃G×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð ` ° Ðà ` àThe€court€also€ordered€that€the€Lawrason€Account,€valuedÐ  \  Ðat€approximately€$36,000,€be€used€to€pay€various€tax€debts.€€FromÐ ¸  Ðthe€$36,000€balance,€$10,850€was€earmarked€to€pay€the€taxes€on€Ð d´  ÐCox's€Advest€IRA€withdrawals,€$10,210€was€to€pay€for€the€couple'sÐ `  Ðfederal€and€state€income€tax€debt€from€1985€and€1986,€and€theÐ ¼  Ðbalance€was€to€be€applied€to€a€joint€debt€of€the€parties€to€KeyÐ h¸ ÐBank.€€The€Ridge€Account€balance€was€approximately€$8,400,€$6,600Ð d Ðâ âof€which€was€to€be€paid€to€Davis€for€the€support€of€their€minorÐ À Ðchildren,€and€the€balance€to€be€applied€toward€the€satisfaction€ofÐ ° Ðtheir€debt€to€Key€Bank.€€Ð \¬ Ðâ âà ` àNeither€party€appealed€from€the€divorce€court's€propertyÐ X Ðdivision€to€a€higher€Maine€court.Ð ´  Ðà ` àAlthough€encouraged€to€do€so€by€the€trustee€inÐ ` ° Ðbankruptcy,€the€Maine€state€district€court€said€nothing€aboutÐ  \  Ðwhether€"the€eventual€divorce€judgment€òòcreatesóó€property€rights€orÐ ¸  Ðòòdeclaresóó€those€rights€which€arose€as€of€filing€of€the€divorce."€€òòSeeóóÐ d´  Ðòòsupraóó.€€Nor€did€it€seek€direction€on€these€questions€from€theÐ `  ÐSupreme€Judicial€Court€of€Maine.€€Rather,€noting€the€bankruptcyÐ ¼  Ðcourt's€recognition€of€"the€special€and€everyday€expertise€of€thisÐ h¸ ÐCourt€to€address€state€law€issues€relative€to€the€division€ofÐ d Ðmarital€property,"€the€divorce€court€simply€undertook€to€fulfill€itsÐ À Ðstatutory€role€under€ðð€953€and€divide€the€marital€property€equitablyÐ l¼ Ðbetween€the€divorcing€spouses.€Ð h Ðà ` àOn€March€26,€2001,€Davis€filed€a€motion€in€the€federalÐ Ä Ðbankruptcy€court€requesting€that€the€court€issue€an€order€(1)Ð pÀ  Ðgranting€her€relief€from€the€bankruptcy€stay€and€(2)€recognizing€andÐ !l" Ðgiving€full€force€and€effect€to€the€state€court's€divorce€judgment.€Ð È"$ ÐFor€purposes€of€the€bankruptcy€case,€the€parties€stipulated€that€theÐ t$Ä& ÐAdvest€IRA€was€entirely€exempt€pursuant€to€title€14,€ðð€4422€of€theÐ  &p!( ÐMaine€Revised€Statutes.׃<×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€trustee€filed€a€response€to€Davis'sÐ Ì'#* Ðmotion.€€There,€he€consented€to€the€granting€to€Davis€of€relief€fromÐ ° Ðthe€automatic€stay,€and€he€requested€that€the€federal€bankruptcyÐ \¬ Ðcourt€enter€an€order€recognizing€the€state€court€divorce€judgmentÐ X Ðwith€the€condition€that€the€bankruptcy€court€refuse€to€adopt€theÐ ´  Ðportion€of€the€judgment€which€set€aside€$10,850€in€the€LawrasonÐ ` ° ÐAccount€for€tax€obligations€and,€instead,€order€that€those€funds€beÐ  \  Ðpaid€to€him€for€the€benefit€of€the€bankruptcy€estate.Ð ¸  Ðà ` àCox€opposed€Davis's€motion€seeking€relief€from€theÐ d´  Ðbankruptcy€stay€in€order€to€execute€the€divorce€property€judgment.€Ð `  ÐHe€argued€that€the€Advest€IRA€had€become€the€property€of€theÐ ¼  Ðbankruptcy€estate,€leaving€Davis€with€only€a€general€unsecured€claimÐ h¸ Ðagainst€the€estate€for€the€amount€in€the€Advest€IRA€awarded€her€byÐ d Ðthe€divorce€court.€€He€also€asserted€that€the€escrowed€funds€couldÐ À Ðnot€be€used€to€pay€down€the€mortgage€owed€to€Key€Bank.€Ð l¼ Ðà ` àThe€bankruptcy€court€determined€that,€pursuant€to€MaineÐ h Ðlaw,€the€Advest€IRA,€to€which€Cox€held€legal€title€when€heÐ Ä Ðpetitioned€for€bankruptcy,€had€by€then€become€a€part€of€theÐ ° Ðbankruptcy€estate.€€The€court€concluded€that€Davis's€right€to€anyÐ \¬ Ðmarital€property€held€in€Cox's€name€was€contingent€and€did€not€vestÐ X Ðuntil€the€divorce€judgment€was€handed€down,€an€event€occurring€afterÐ ´  Ðthe€bankruptcy€petition€had€been€filed.€€òòDavisóó€v.€òòCoxóó€(òòIn€re€Coxóó),Ð ` ° Ð274€B.R.€13,€23€(Bankr.€D.€Me.€2002).€€By€then,€the€Advest€IRA,Ð  \  Ðowned€by€Cox,€was€under€the€jurisdiction€of€the€bankruptcy€court.€Ð ¸  ÐAs€a€result,€Davis€acquired€only€a€general,€unsecured€claim€againstÐ d´  ÐCox's€bankruptcy€estate€for€the€$62,250€interest€in€the€IRA€awardedÐ `  Ðher€by€the€Maine€divorce€court.€€òòId.óó€at€28.€€In€reaching€itsÐ ¼  Ðconclusion,€the€bankruptcy€court€noted€that€Maine's€divorce€statuteÐ h¸ Ðcontained€various€specific€remedies€to€protect€the€marital€property,Ð d Ðmost€relevantly€attachment.€€The€court€reasoned:Ð À ÐÓÓà8 ` àIf€a€divorcing€spouse's€contingent€rights€toÐ l¼ Ða€distribution€of€marital€property€from€assetsÐ B’ Ðheld€in€the€other's€name€can€be€protected€byÐ h Ðattachment,€it€follows€they€are€unprotectedÐ î> Ðwithout€it€(or€its€functional€equivalent);€.Ð Ä Ð.€.€if€the€pendency€of€a€divorce€does€not,€ofÐ šê Ðitself,€disable€a€spouse€from€dealing€withÐ pÀ  Ðproperty€held€in€his€or€her€name,€it€simplyÐ F –! Ðcannot€be€that€a€Maine€non„debtor€spouse'sÐ !l" Ðunsecured,€undeclared€rights€to€a€potentialÐ ò!B# Ðmarital€property€distribution€trump€theÐ È"$ Ðestate's€rights€at€bankruptcy.О#î%` -` - ÐÌòòId.óó€(citations€omitted).Ð J%š ' ÐÌÓŠQÓà ` àAs€to€the€funds€held€in€escrow,€the€bankruptcy€court€heldÐ ö&F") Ðthat€the€state€court's€pre„petition€order€placing€the€funds€inÐ ¢(ò#+ Ðescrow€operated€effectively€as€an€attachment€of€those€funds.€€òòId.óóÐ N*ž%- Ðat€33.€€The€state€court€order€placed€the€funds€in€òòcustodiaóó€òòlegisóó,Ð ú+J'/ Ðthereby€securing€Davis's€claim€pending€entry€of€the€divorceÐ ° Ðjudgment.€€òòId.óó€€As€a€result,€Davis's€right€to€benefit€from€theÐ \¬ Ðdistribution€of€the€escrow€funds€in€accordance€with€the€divorceÐ X Ðjudgment€was€superior€to€the€rights€of€the€bankruptcy€estate€in€theÐ ´  Ðfunds.€€òòId.óóÐ ` ° Ðà ` àMs.€Davis€and€Cox€both€appealed€from€the€bankruptcyÐ  \  Ðcourt's€judgment€to€the€district€court.€€The€district€court€affirmedÐ ¸  Ðthe€bankruptcy€court,€adopting€its€opinion€in€all€respects.€€Ð d´  ÐÓ€ #(…h88%ÓØ! !ØÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýò òÝ‚3£yYÝÔ2…hÔÚ  ÚIIÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0 ` àÝ  ÝDISCUSSION݃3£yY©YÝŒÐ` ` (#` (# ÐŒÝ  ÝØ! !ØÓ€ -(ú½88#ÓÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚3£òZÝÔ2ú½ÔÚ  ÚAÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0 ` àÝ  ÝStandard€of€Review݃3£òZ[ÝŒÐØ(` (#` (# ÐŒÝ  Ýà ` àó óUnder€28€U.S.C.€ðð€158,€appeals€from€the€bankruptcy€courtÐ  ð Ðgo€directly€either€to€the€district€court€(as€here)€or€else€to€aÐ Lœ Ðfederal€bankruptcy€appellate€panel€("B.A.P.").€€Nonetheless,€whenÐ øH Ðan€appeal€reaches€us€from€one€of€these€tribunals,€this€court€focusesÐ ¤ô Є„€especially,€as€here,€where€the€district€court€has€affirmed€on€theÐ P  Ðbasis€of€the€bankruptcy€court's€findings€and€rationale€„„€on€theÐ üL Ðdecision€of€the€bankruptcy€court.€€We€examine€that€court's€findingsÐ ¨ø  Ðof€fact€for€clear€error€and€afford€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€review€to€its€conclusionsÐ T!¤" Ðof€law.€€òòSeeóó€òòGromanóó€v.€òòWatmanóó€(òòIn€re€Watmanóó),€301€F.3d€3,€7€(1stÐ #P$ ÐCir.€2002);€òòMartinóó€v.€òòBajgaróó€(òòIn€re€Bajgaróó),€104€F.3d€495,€497€(1stÐ ¬$ü& ÐCir.€1997).ò òÐ X&¨!( ÐÓ€ /( ¾88-ÓØ! !ØÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚3£6`ÝÔ2 ¾ÔÚ  ÚBÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0 ` àÝ  ÝAdvest€IRAó ó݃3£6`c`ÝŒÐ(T#*` (#` (# ÐŒÝ  Ýà ` àA€debtor's€estate€in€bankruptcy€comprises€all€property€inÐ Ì)%, Ðwhich€the€debtor€has€"legal€or€equitable€interests."€€11€U.S.C.€ððÐ x+È&. Ð541(a).€€The€bankruptcy€court€„„€concluding€that€Cox,€as€the€ownerÐ ° Ðof€the€Advest€IRA,€would€have€held€all€legal€and€equitable€interestÐ \¬ Ðin€it€until€the€time€of€the€divorce€court's€judgment€awarding€it€toÐ X ÐDavis€„„€ruled€that€the€Advest€IRA€became€a€part€of€the€bankruptcyÐ ´  Ðestate€when€Cox€petitioned€for€bankruptcy.׃=×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€At€that€time,€theÐ ` ° Ðdivorce€action€was€ongoing€in€the€state€court€but€that€tribunal€hadÐ  \  Ðyet€to€issue€its€judgment€determining€òòinteróó€òòaliaóó€how€the€maritalÐ ¸  Ðproperty€was€to€be€divided€as€between€the€two€spouses.€€Accordingly,Ð d´  Ðthe€bankruptcy€court€believed€that€by€the€time€of€the€state€court'sÐ `  Ðjudgment€the€Advest€IRA€was€no€longer€a€marital€asset€available€forÐ ° Ðdistribution€by€that€court€to€Davis.Ð \¬ Ðà ` àMs.€Davis€disputes€the€above€analysis.€€Her€primaryÐ X Ðthesis€is€that,€after€commencement€of€a€divorce€proceeding,€MaineÐ ´  Ðlaw€should€be€understood€as€providing€to€a€non„owner€spouse€anÐ ` ° Ðinchoate€equitable€interest€in€all€marital€assets€separately€ownedÐ  \  Ðby€the€other€spouse.€€Property€in€which€the€debtor„spouse€holdsÐ ¸  Ðlegal€title€does€not,€she€notes,€become€property€of€the€bankruptcyÐ d´  Ðestate€"to€the€extent€of€any€equitable€interest€in€such€property€theÐ `  Ðdebtor€does€not€hold."€€11€U.S.C.€ðð€541(d).€€Davis's€inchoate€equityÐ ¼  Ðinterest€in€the€Advest€IRA€was,€she€argues,€excluded€from€Cox'sÐ h¸ Ðbankruptcy€estate€by€operation€of€ðð€541(d).€€When€the€divorce€courtÐ d Ðlater€entered€its€judgment€granting€the€divorce€and€awarding€a€Ð À Ðportion€of€the€Advest€IRA€to€Davis,€her€inchoate€equity€in€the€IRAÐ l¼ Ðbecame€choate€to€the€extent€of€the€judgment,€and€the€award€tookÐ h Ðeffect,€so€she€contends,€free€and€clear€of€Cox's€bankruptcy.€€As€anÐ Ä Ðalternative€to€this€theory,€Davis€argues€that€Cox€should€be€deemedÐ pÀ  Ðto€have€held€the€Advest€IRA€upon€a€constructive€trust€for€herÐ !l" Ðbenefit€prior€to€the€bankruptcy,€resulting€in€its€provisionalÐ È"$ Ðexclusion€from€the€bankruptcy€estate€until€the€divorce€court's€finalÐ t$Ä& Ðdisposition€of€the€marital€property€clarified€what€assets€went€toÐ  &p!( Ðâ âDavis.Ð Ì'#* Ðà ` àA€number€of€courts€in€divorce€situations€outside€MaineÐ ° Ðhave€adopted€one€or€the€other€of€the€above€theories.׃F×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€respect€toÐ \¬ Ðâ âthe€first,€some€courts€infer€from€divorce€laws€not€unlike€Maine'sÐ X Ðthat,€once€a€divorce€proceeding€has€begun,€the€non„debtor€spouseÐ ´  Ðacquires€an€inchoate€equitable€interest€in€all€assets€held€in€theÐ ` ° Ðother€spouse's€name€that€form€a€part€of€the€divisible€maritalÐ  \  Ðestate.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòWhiteóó€v.€òòBellóó€(òòIn€re€Whiteóó),€212€B.R.€979,€982Ð ¸  Ð(B.A.P.€10th€Cir.€1997)€(relying€on€Wyoming€law€to€infer€a€speciesÐ d´  Ðof€"co„ownership"€in€all€marital€property€upon€filing€of€divorceÐ `  Ðpetition);€òòRobergeóó€v.€òòRobergeóó,€188€B.R.€366,€368„69€(E.D.€Va.€1995),Ð ¼  Ðòòaff'dóó,€òòRobergeóó€v.€òòBuisóó,€95€F.3d€42€(4th€Cir.)€(unpublished)Ð h¸ Ð(concluding€under€Florida€law€equitable€rights€vest€upon€the€filingÐ d Ðof€divorce€petition).€€Ð À Ðà ` àOther€courts€have€premised€a€spouse's€equitable€rights€in€Ð l¼ Ðmarital€property€owned€by€the€debtor€spouse€upon€a€theory€ofÐ h Ðconstructive€lien€or€constructive€trust.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòWalstonóó€v.Ð Ä ÐòòWalstonóó,€190€B.R.€66,€69„70€(E.D.N.C.€1995)€(concluding€"the€factÐ pÀ  Ðof€a€pending€action€for€the€inevitable€distribution€of€specifiedÐ !l" Ðproperty€should€operate€to€create€a€constructive€lien€in€favor€ofÐ È"$ Ðthe€non„debtor€spouse");€òòIn€re€Perryóó,€131€B.R.€763,€767„68€(Bankr.Ð t$Ä& ÐD.€Mass.€1991)€(relying€on€constructive€trust€theory€to€exclude€non„Ð ° Ðdebtor€spouse's€undeclared€interest€in€marital€property€fromÐ \¬ Ðbankruptcy€estate).€Ð X Ðà ` àOn€the€facts€of€this€case,€we€conclude€that,€under€MaineÐ ´  Ðlaw,€Davis€did€indeed€possess€at€bankruptcy€an€equitable€interestÐ ` ° Ðin€the€Advest€IRA€such€as€prevented€it,€by€virtue€of€11€U.S.C.€ððÐ  \  Ð541(d),€from€becoming€at€that€moment€a€part€of€Cox's€bankruptcyÐ ¸  Ðestate.€€In€reaching€this€result,€we€proceed€narrowly€on€theÐ d´  Ðremedial€theory€of€constructive€trust.€€We€need€not€decide,€andÐ `  Ðindeed€think€it€inappropriate€for€a€federal€court€to€decide€withoutÐ ¼  Ðfirst€seeking€more€specific€guidance€from€Maine's€Supreme€JudicialÐ h¸ ÐCourt,€whether€Maine€law,€broadly€applied,€gives€to€non„ownerÐ d Ðspouses€in€ordinary€circumstances€after€commencement€of€a€divorceÐ À Ðcase,€but€before€entry€of€judgment,€an€inchoate€equitable€interestÐ l¼ Ðin€marital€assets€owned€by€the€owner€spouse.€€Such€a€general€holdingÐ h Ðwould€have€profound€implications€for€Maine's€law€of€creditors'Ð Ä Ðrights€in€a€variety€of€factual€situations€different€from€theÐ pÀ  Ðpresent.€€As€the€issue€is€one€of€first€impression€in€Maine,€Maine'sÐ !l" Ðhighest€court€rather€than€a€federal€court€should€be€the€first€toÐ È"$ Ðplough€such€new€territory.Ð t$Ä& Ðà ` àThe€special€equities€favoring€Davis€on€the€facts€of€thisÐ  &p!( Ðparticular€case€are,€however,€compelling.€€The€state€divorce€court'sÐ Ì'#* Ðaward€of€most€of€the€Advest€IRA€to€Davis€was€granted,€following€aÐ x)È$, Ðfour„day€trial,€expressly€in€order€to€restore€her€to€the€positionÐ $+t&. Ðshe€would€have€been€in€had€not€Cox€misapplied€marital€assets€to€hisÐ ° Ðown€use€in€disobedience€of€the€court's€preliminary€injunction€andÐ \¬ Ðthe€interim€order€„„€a€pattern€of€misconduct€that€commenced€wellÐ X Ðbefore€Cox€filed€for€bankruptcy.€€Because€of€Cox's€disability€andÐ ´  Ðsupport€needs,€attachment€of€the€IRA€does€not€appear€to€have€beenÐ ` ° Ðan€€option€open€to€Davis€prior€to€bankruptcy.€€14€M.R.S.€ððÐ  \  Ð4422(13)(E).€€òòSeeóó€note€4,€òòsupraóó.€€The€Maine€court€ultimately€foundÐ ¸  ÐCox€in€contempt€and,€as€a€remedy,€ordered€payment€to€Davis€ofÐ d´  Ð$65,250€from€the€Advest€IRA,€a€remedy€that€will€have€meaning€ifÐ `  ÐDavis€had€an€equitable€interest€in€the€Advest€IRA€prior€to€Cox'sÐ ¼  Ðfiling€of€his€petition€for€bankruptcy€but€not€otherwise.€€On€theÐ h¸ Ðpresent€facts,€especially€given€Cox's€contemptuous€behavior€beforeÐ d Ðthe€filing€for€bankruptcy,€we€think€a€Maine€court,€applying€MaineÐ À Ðlaw,€would€in€these€circumstances€rule€that,€by€the€time€he€filedÐ l¼ Ðfor€bankruptcy,€Cox€held€the€Advest€IRA€upon€a€constructive€trustÐ h Ðfor€his€spouse,€Davis,€subject€to€the€divorce€court's€ultimateÐ Ä Ðdetermination€of€its€ownership.Ð pÀ  Ðà ` àWe€begin€our€analysis€by€looking€at€Maine€law€asÐ !l" Ðpresently€reflected€in€its€divorce€statute,€and€in€the€opinions€ofÐ È"$ Ðits€Supreme€Judicial€Court.€€òòButneróó€v.€òòUnited€Statesóó,€440€U.S.€48,Ð t$Ä& Ð54€(1979)€(stating€that€what€constitutes€a€legal€or€equitableÐ  &p!( Ðinterest€for€bankruptcy€purposes€turns€on€state€law).€Ð  Ì'#* ÐØ! !ØÓ€ +(å£88/ÓÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýò òÝ‚3£ƒÝÔ2å£ÔÚ  Ú1Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0 ` àÝ  ÝMaine's€Statutory€Lawó ó݃3£ƒAƒÝŒÐ°` (#` (# ÐŒÝ  ÝÓ€ (Eh88+Óà ` àMaine's€divorce€law€embodies€major€revisions€adopted€inÐ xÈ Ð1972€by€the€Maine€legislature.€€òòSeeóó€òòZillertóó€v.€òòZillertóó,€395€A.2dÐ $t Ð1152,€1154„55€(Me.€1978).€€The€primary€goal€of€these€modificationsÐ Ð  Ðwas€to€ensure€that,€upon€divorce,€each€spouse€€receives€an€equitableÐ | Ì Ðshare€of€the€so„called€"marital€property."€€òòSeeóó€òòFournieróó€v.Ð ( x  ÐòòFournieróó,€376€A.2d€100,€102€(Me.€1977).€€Under€Maine's€statute,€theÐ Ô$  Ðdivorce€court€is€directed€and€authorized€to€divide€the€maritalÐ €Ð  Ðproperty€as€equity€demands,€taking€into€account€the€various€factorsÐ ,|  Ðset€forth€in€Me.€Rev.€Stat.€Ann.€tit.€19„A,€ðð€953(1).׃@×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€TheÐ Ø( Ðlegislature€broadly€defined€"marital€property"€to€encompass€"allÐ „Ô Ðproperty€acquired€by€either€spouse€subsequent€to€the€marriage...Ð 0€ Ðregardless€of€whether€title€is€held€individually€or€by€the€spouseÐ Ü, Ðin€some€form€of€co„ownership."€€òòId.óó€at€ðð€953(3).€€According€toÐ ˆØ ÐMaine's€Supreme€Judicial€Court,€this€statutory€definition€reflectsÐ 4„ Ðthe€central€premise€on€which€the€statute€was€founded:€€that€marriageÐ à0 Ðis€a€partnership€in€which€two€individuals€combine€their€efforts€intoÐ ŒÜ  Ða€single€enterprise.€€òòSeeóó€òòLongóó€v.€òòLongóó,€697€A.2d€1317,€1320€(Me.Ð ° Ð1997).€€With€this€premise€in€mind,€courts,€when€determining€a€"just"Ð \¬ Ðdivision€of€marital€property€are€to€take€into€account€not€only€aÐ X Ðspouse's€monetary€contributions€but€the€non„monetary€ones€madeÐ ´  Ðduring€a€marriage€such€as€being€the€primary€caretaker€for€theÐ ` ° Ðchildren.€€òòSeeóó€Me.€Rev.€Stat.€Ann.€tit.€19„A,€ðð€953(1);€òòCarteróó€v.Ð  \  ÐòòCarteróó,€419€A.2d€1018,€1020„21€(Me.€1980).€Ð ¸  Ðà ` àTo€help€ensure€the€preservation€of€the€marital€assets€forÐ d´  Ðequitable€distribution,€the€Maine€legislature€provided€that€when€a€Ð `  Ðpetition€for€divorce€is€filed,€a€standard€preliminary€injunctionÐ ¼  Ðwill€issue,€preventing€either€spouse,€during€the€course€of€theÐ h¸ Ðdivorce€proceeding,€from€"transferring,€encumbering,€selling,€orÐ d Ðotherwise€disposing€of€the€property€of€either€or€both€of€theÐ À Ðparties,€except€in€the€usual€course€of€business€or€for€theÐ l¼ Ðnecessities€of€life."€€Me.€Rev.€Stat.€Ann.€tit.€19„A,€ððÐ h Ð903(1)(B)(1).€€The€divorce€statute€also€authorizes€the€"[a]ttachmentÐ Ä Ðof€real€or€personal€property€or€trustee€process."€€òòId.óó€at€ðð€903(5);Ð pÀ  ÐòòLibertyóó€v.€òòLibertyóó,€769€A.2d€845,€846€(Me.€2001).€€The€statutoryÐ !l" Ðdirection€for€issuance€of€a€preliminary€injunction€during€pendencyÐ È"$ Ðof€the€divorce€proceeding,€as€well€as€the€provisions€for€attachmentÐ t$Ä& Ðand€other€specified€remedies,€reflect€a€clear€legislative€intent€toÐ  &p!( Ðprevent€divorcing€spouses€from€disposing€unfairly€òòpendenteóó€òòliteóó€ofÐ Ì'#* Ðmarital€assets€that,€upon€divorce,€the€court€must€inevitablyÐ x)È$, Ðdetermine€belong€in€equity€to€one€or€the€other€of€them.€€SuchÐ $+t&. Ðassets,€as€already€noted,€include€ones€that€are€owned€in€theÐ ° Ðindividual€name€of€one€or€the€other€spouse.€€That€such€statutoryÐ \¬ Ðrestrictions€come€into€existence€upon€the€institution€of€a€divorceÐ X Ðproceeding€indicates€the€Maine€legislature's€expectation€that€theÐ ´  Ðfiling€of€a€divorce€case€„„€and€not€just€the€entry€of€judgment€atÐ ` ° Ðthe€end€of€the€case€„„€will€significantly€affect€each€spouse's€Ð  \  Ðproperty€rights.€Ð ¸  Ðà ` àThe€bankruptcy€court€nevertheless€took€the€view€that€byÐ d´  Ðproviding€only€for€a€preliminary€injunction,€attachment€and€certainÐ `  Ðother€specific€remedies,€the€Maine€legislature€indicated€a€wish€toÐ ¼  Ðdeny€to€a€non„owner€spouse€any€other€unstated€remedies,€includingÐ h¸ Ðequitable€ones.€€We€do€not€think€this€necessarily€follows.€Ð d ÐEnactment€of€these€particular€remedies€also€betrayed€a€more€generalÐ À Ðlegislative€intent,€once€divorce€proceedings€had€begun,€to€shelterÐ l¼ Ðand€sequester€marital€assets€for€the€benefit€of€both€spouses€untilÐ h Ðthe€court€could€effect€their€just€division.€€The€Maine€statute€goesÐ Ä Ðon€to€state€that€"[t]he€remedies€provided€in€this€subsection€forÐ pÀ  Ðenforcement€of€a€preliminary€injunction€are€in€addition€to€any€otherÐ !l" Ðcivil€or€criminal€remedies€available,€including€civil€contempt€ofÐ È"$ Ðcourt."€€Me.€Rev.€Stat.€Ann.€tit.€19„A,€ðð€903(3)(C).€€The€statutoryÐ t$Ä& Ðlanguage€and€scheme€are€thus€compatible€with€„„€indeed,€stronglyÐ  &p!( Ðsuggest€„„€legislative€approval€of€supplemental€measures€that€aÐ Ì'#* Ðcourt€might€find€reasonable€and€necessary€to€achieve€the€goal€ofÐ x)È$, Ðsafeguarding€the€marital€estate€until€it€can€be€properly€divided.€Ð $+t&. ÐThe€Supreme€Judicial€Court€of€Maine€has€expressly€stated€that€"theÐ ° Ðdivorce€court's€power€to€divide€marital€property€includes€powersÐ \¬ Ðnecessary€to€render€effective€the€power€to€divide."€€òòBakeróó€v.€òòBakeróó,Ð X Ð444€A.2d€982,€986€(Me.€1982).Ð ´  Ðà ` àThe€matter€of€supplementary€equitable€remedies€takes€onÐ ` ° Ðspecial€significance€here€where€the€property€at€issue€(i.e.€theÐ  \  ÐAdvest€IRA)€was€apparently€exempted€by€Maine€law€from€attachment,Ð ¸  Ðalthough€it€also€formed€a€part€of€the€marital€property€that€theÐ d´  ÐMaine€court€ultimately€could€and€did€award€to€Davis.€€Under€MaineÐ `  Ðlaw,€an€IRA€is€exempt€from€attachment€"to€the€extent€reasonablyÐ ¼  Ðnecessary"€for€the€support€of€a€debtor€and€his€dependents.€€òòSeeóó€Me.Ð h¸ ÐRev.€Stat.€Ann.€tit.€14,€ðð€4422(13)(E).òòóóÔ‡X®DXXX®DÔ€€òòSteelstone€Indus.,€Inc.óó,Ð d Ð785€A.2d€at€1258„1259.Ô#†X®DXXX®D5ž#Ô€€Relying€on€the€same€statute,€the€partiesÐ À Ðhave€stipulated€to€the€Advest€IRA's€exempt€status€in€bankruptcy,€andÐ l¼ Ðthe€bankruptcy€court€relevantly€noted€that€the€"'reasonablyÐ h Ðnecessary'€needs€of€Cox€and€his€family€would€seem€to€beÐ Ä Ðsubstantial."€€òòCoxóó,€274€B.R.€at€31€n.29.€€Thus,€any€attempt€by€DavisÐ pÀ  Ðto€have€protected€her€interest€in€the€Advest€IRA€by€attaching€itÐ !l" Ðwould€likely€have€been€futile.€€Davis€did€attempt€diligently€ifÐ È"$ Ðunsuccessfully€in€other€ways€to€protect€her€interest,€by€obtainingÐ t$Ä& Ða€court€order€tightening€the€injunction€after€Cox€violated€theÐ  &p!( Ðpreviously€worded€Ôf  ÔoneÔf  ÔÔg Ô,€and€by€sending€a€letter€to€Advest,€the€entityÐ Ì'#* Ðmaintaining€the€IRA,€advising€it€of€the€pending€divorceÔf  Ô€Ôg Ôand€theÐ x)È$, Ðterms€of€the€injunction.€€Ð $+t&. Ðà ` àUltimately,€the€divorce€court,€after€having€the€benefitÐ ° Ðof€a€four„day€trial€during€which€it€reviewed€exhaustively€theÐ \¬ Ðcircumstances€and€relationship€of€the€two€divorcing€spouses,€awardedÐ X Ðto€Davis€a€substantial€interest€in€the€Advest€IRA€as€compensationÐ ´  Ðfor€Cox's€contempt€of€the€court's€preliminary€injunction.€€ThisÐ ` ° Ðaward€was€part€of€the€court's€comprehensive€division€of€the€totalÐ  \  Ðmarital€property€as€between€the€divorcing€spouses.€€In€the€courseÐ ¸  Ðof€these€proceedings€the€court€was€fully€informed€of€Cox'sÐ d´  Ðdisability€and€support€needs€as€well€asÔf  Ô€DÔg Ôavis's€conflicting€needsÐ `  Ðand€claims,€and€the€needs€of€their€children.€€No€appeal€from€theÐ ¼  Ðdivorce€court's€property€division€was€taken€either€by€Cox€or€Davis.€Ð h¸ ÐThe€question€now€at€hand,€therefore,€is€whether€that€division€willÐ d Ðbe€given€effect€or€whether,€in€some€part,€it€will€be€skewed€toÐ À ÐDavis's€detriment,€allowing€Cox€to€regain€all€of€the€Advest€IRAÐ l¼ Ðnotwithstanding€his€violation€of€the€preliminary€injunction€andÐ h Ðcontrary€to€the€considered€judgment€of€the€court€most€familiar€withÐ Ä Ðthe€equities€as€between€both€parties.€€Ð pÀ  Ðà ` àTo€be€sure,€it€can€be€argued€that€Cox's€ability,€byÐ !l" Ðvirtue€of€bankruptcy,€to€regain€the€Advest€IRA€merely€reflects€theÐ È"$ Ðapplication€under€federal€bankruptcy€law€of€an€exemption€for€theÐ t$Ä& Ðdebtor's€support€needs€derived€from€a€Maine€state€statute.€€Me.€Rev.Ð  &p!( ÐStat.€Ann.€tit.€14€ðð€4422(13)(E);€see€note€4,€òòsupraóó.€€But€theÐ Ì'#* Ðdisposition€of€marital€property€made€by€the€state€divorce€judge€tookÐ x)È$, Ðinto€comprehensive€account€the€equities€as€between€the€divorcingÐ $+t&. Ðparties,€including€Cox's€needs€insofar€as€they€could€properly€beÐ ° Ðaccommodated.€€That€disposition,€rather€than€the€narrower€supportÐ \¬ Ðprovision€of€ðð€4422(13)(E),€reflected€Maine'sÔg ÔÔf  ÔÔg ÔÔf  ÔÔg Ô€final€application€ofÔf  ÔÐ X Ðits€Ôf  ÔÔg Ôown€lawÔf  Ô.Ôg ԀР´  ÐÓ€ 6(¤88ÓØ! !ØÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýò òÝ‚3£ô¬ÝÔ2¤ÔÚ  Ú2Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0 ` àÝ  ÝMaine€Case€Lawó ó݃3£ô¬$­ÝŒÐ` °` (#` (# ÐŒÝ  Ýà ` àCox€nonetheless€argues€that€Maine€case€law€supports€hisÐ ( x  Ðposition€that,€until€the€actual€division€of€the€marital€property€isÐ Ô$  Ðdecided€by€a€divorce€court's€judgment,€each€spouse€wholly€owns€hisÐ €Ð  Ðor€her€separately€owned€property€even€if€forming€a€part€of€theÐ ,|  Ðmarital€estate.€€Cox€bases€this€argument€on€Maine€cases€interpretingÐ Ø( Ðspousal€property€rights€where,€however,€divorce€was€neitherÐ „Ô Ðcontemplated€nor€in€process.€€We€do€not€find€those€cases€dispositiveÐ 0€ Ðhere.€Ð Ü, Ðà ` àAs€already€pointed€out,€the€legislature's€provision€forÐ ˆØ Ða€preliminary€injunction€and€other€protective€remedies€once€aÐ 4„ Ðdivorce€case€is€filed€indicate€a€legislative€intent€to€constrain€theÐ à0 Ðfree€disposition€of€marital€property€during€the€period€after€divorceÐ ŒÜ  Ðproceedings€begin.€€òòSeeóó€òòPlourdeóó€v.€òòPlourdeóó,€678€A.2d€1032,€1035„36Ð 8!ˆ" Ð(Me.€1996)€(commenting€that€the€mandatory€preliminary€injunction€isÐ ä"4$ Ðdesigned€to€maintain€the€status€quo€and€prevent€the€diminution€ofÐ $à& Ðmarital€property€prior€to€final€judgment).€€Thus€we€reject€Cox'sÐ <&Œ!( Ðsuggestion€that€the€freedom€of€an€owner€spouse€to€deal€withÐ è'8#* Ðseparately„owned€marital€assets€after€commencement€of€divorceÐ ”)ä$, Ðproceedings€is€no€more€limited€than€it€ever€was€before.€€The€MaineÐ @+&. Ðcase€law€cited€by€Cox€deals€with€situations€not€involving€divorce.€Ð ° ÐThose€cases€merely€hold€that€where€a€divorce€is€òònotóó€involved,Ð \¬ Ðmarital€property€that€is€individually€held€may€be€disposed€of€atÐ X Ðwill€by€either€spouse.€€òòSeeóó€òòLongóó,€697€A.2d€at€1321€(noting€thatÐ ´  Ð"[t]he€'marital€property'€designation€grants€no€present€rights€[ofÐ ` ° Ðthe€non„owner€spouse]€in€the€property€during€the€marriage").€€InÐ  \  Ðother€words,€a€non„owner€spouse€does€not,€òòabsent€a€divorceÐ ¸  Ðsituationóó,€acquire€by€virtue€of€the€marital€relationship€alone€anÐ d´  Ðinterest,€beneficial€or€otherwise,€in€the€owner„spouse's€property.€Ð `  ÐòòId.óó€€Ð ¼  Ðà ` àThe€Supreme€Judicial€Court€of€Maine€has€never€decidedÔg ÔÔf  ÔÔg ÔÔf  ÔÐ h¸ Ðwhether,€once€a€divorce€proceeding€has€begun,€a€non„owner€spouseÐ d Ðholds€anÔf  Ô€Ôg Ôequity€interest€in€marital€property€held€by€an€ownerÐ À Ðspouse.€€As€already€indicated,€however,€the€creation€of€specificÐ l¼ Ðprotective€remedies€during€the€divorce€proceeding€reflects€aÐ h Ðlegislative€intent€that€marital€assets€be€sheltered€and€preservedÐ Ä Ðduring€that€period.€€Moreover,€the€aims€of€Maine's€Ôf  ÔÔg ÔmodernizedÐ pÀ  Ðdivorce€law€are€at€odds€with€the€view€that,€during€divorceÐ !l" Ðproceedings,€a€non„owner€spouse€is€without€some€Ôf  Ôinterest€inÔg ÔÔf  ÔÔg ÔÔf  ÔÔg Ô€theÐ È"$ Ðmarital€property€that€is€soon€toÔf  ÔÔg ÔÔf  ÔÔg ÔÔf  Ô€be€divided€at€the€end€of€theÐ t$Ä& Ðproceeding.€€The€òòLongóó€court€noted€that€previously€at€common€lawÐ  &p!( Ð"marriage€did€not€create€rights€to€property€held€during€theÐ Ì'#* Ðmarriage,€and€a€spouse€could€acquire€an€interest€in€the€property€ofÐ x)È$, Ðthe€other€only€by€dower€or€courtesy€right€on€the€death€of€theÐ $+t&. Ðother."€€697€A.2d€at€1320.€€To€avoid€the€inequities€at€common€law,Ð ° Ðthe€court€pointed€out€that€the€Maine€legislature€adopted€the€"sharedÐ \¬ Ðenterprise€or€partnership€theory"€of€marriage.€€òòId.óó€€Under€thisÐ X Ðtheory,€the€Court€wrote,€the€statute€provides€"a€mechanism€forÐ ´  Ðidentifying€marital€property,€creates€for€spouses€a€right€to€anÐ ` ° Ðequitable€share€of€marital€property,€and€empowers€the€court€toÐ  \  Ðequitably€divide€the€property."€€òòId.óó€at€1321.€€The€court€went€on€toÐ ¸  Ðdiscuss€the€status€of€property€held€in€the€name€of€one€spouse.€Ð d´  ÐÓÓà8 ` àThus€property€held€in€the€name€of€one€spouseÐ `  Ðmay€still€be€treated€as€"marital€property."€Ð æ6 ÐThe€"marital€property"€designation€grants€noÐ ¼  Ðpresent€rights€in€the€property€during€theÐ ’â Ðmarriage€òòbut,€on€divorce,óó€the€court€mustÐ h¸ Ðdivide€all€marital€property€"as€the€courtÐ >Ž Ðdeems€just"€granting€an€equitable€share€toÐ d Ðeach€spouse.Ðê:` -` - ÐÌÓO¿ÓòòId.óó€(emphasis€supplied);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòSzelenyióó€v.€òòMilleróó,€564€A.2d€768,Ð –æ Ð770€(Me.€1989)€(stating€that€the€"marital€property"€designation€doesÐ B’ Ðnot€affect€property€rights€"òòin€which€a€divorce€or€legal€separationÐ î> Ðis€neither€pending€nor€contemplatedóó")€(emphasis€supplied);€òòFournieróó,Ð šê Ð376€A.2d€at€102€("The€Act€does€not€prevent€married€persons€fromÐ F –! Ðowning€property€separately€during€marriage€and€disposing€of€it€inÐ ò!B# Ðany€fashion€either€of€them€may€choose,€òòassuming€neither€a€separationÐ ž#î% Ðnor€a€divorce€intervenesóó.")€(emphasis€supplied)€(citing€òòIn€reÐ J%š ' ÐQuestions€Submitted€by€the€United€States€District€Court€in€Imel€v.Ð ö&F") ÐUnited€Statesóó,€517€P.2d€1331,€1335€(Colo.€1974)).׃H×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р¢(ò#+ Ðà ` àA€spouse,€therefore,€holds€property€subject€to€the€non„Ð ° Ðowner€spouse's€"right€to€equitable€distribution"€upon€divorce.Ð \¬ ÐòòSaleniusóó€v.€òòSaleniusóó,€654€A.2d€426,€429€(Me.€1995).€€It€logicallyÐ X Ðfollows€that€after€a€divorce€proceeding€has€commenced€the€MaineÐ ´  Ðcourts€will€afford€such€reasonable€protection€as€may€be€required€toÐ ` ° Ðensure€that€a€non„owner€spouse's€rights€to€equitable€distributionÐ  \  Ðare€not€thwarted€by€the€owner€spouse€prior€to€the€time€the€court€canÐ ¸  Ðissue€its€decree€dividing€the€property.€€According€to€the€SupremeÐ d´  ÐJudicial€Court€of€Maine,€the€Maine€courts€"are€vested€with€theÐ `  Ðgeneral€power€as€well€as€duty€to€deal€with€all€marital€property."€Ð ¼  ÐòòBryantóó€v.€òòBryantóó,€411€A.2d€391,€393€(Me.€1980).€Ð h¸ ÐÓ€ >(¤886ÓØ! !ØÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýò òÝ‚3£¢ÉÝÔ2¤ÔÚ  Ú3Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0 ` àÝ  ÝEquitable€Reliefó ó݃3£¢ÉÒÉÝŒÐd` (#` (# ÐŒÝ  Ýà ` àIn€the€present€case,€none€of€the€legal€remediesÐ Ü, Ðspecifically€provided€under€Maine€law€sufficed€to€have€prevented€Ð ˆØ ÐDavis's€interest€in€the€IRA€from€being€included€in€her€husband'sÐ 4„ Ðbankruptcy€estate.€€While€the€mandatory€preliminary€injunctionÐ à0 Ðforbad€Cox's€improper€inter„meddling€with€the€Advest€IRA,€it€did€notÐ ŒÜ  Ðexpressly€establish€a€lien€in€Davis's€favor;€and€it€does€not€appearÐ 8!ˆ" Ðthat€had€she€attempted€in€advance€of€bankruptcy€to€attach€the€AdvestÐ ä"4$ ÐIRA€that€she€could€have€done€so€given€the€statutory€exemption€nowÐ $à& Ðclaimed€by€Cox.€€òòSeeóó€òòsupraóó.€€In€the€bankruptcy€court's€view,€thisÐ <&Œ!( Ðabsence€of€any€express€legal€remedy€confirms€a€legislative€desireÐ ° Ðto€leave€Davis€without€recourse.€€As€a€result,€her€former€husbandÐ \¬ Ðwill,€insofar€as€appears,€take€the€Advest€IRA€in€spite€of€the€factÐ X Ðthat€the€divorce€court€has€determined,€after€an€extensive€trial€andÐ ´  Ðfull€consideration€of€the€equities,€that,€in€equity,€this€maritalÐ ` ° Ðasset€belongs,€in€large€part,€to€her.€€Ironically,€the€husband'sÐ  \  Ðcreditors€will€receive€no€benefit€from€this€outcome;€indeed,€theyÐ ¸  Ðwill€be€worse€off€in€that€their€claims€will€now€be€diluted€byÐ d´  ÐDavis's.€€Only€Cox€personally€will€benefit,€winning€in€bankruptcyÐ `  Ðwhat€he€lost€in€the€divorce€court.Ð ¼  Ðà ` àWe€do€not€believe€that€either€Maine€law€or€federalÐ h¸ Ðbankruptcy€law,€which€relies€here€upon€Maine€property€law,€warrantsÐ d Ðsuch€a€result.€€The€Maine€legislature€has€provided€that€all€maritalÐ À Ðassets€be€equitably€divided€by€the€divorce€court's€judgment,€and€weÐ l¼ Ðmay€assume€that€the€divorce€court€here€acted€properly€and€within€itsÐ h Ðauthority€in€awarding€the€lion's€share€of€the€Advest€IRA€to€Davis,Ð Ä Ðno€appeal€from€its€judgment€having€been€taken.€€Moreover,€the€awardÐ pÀ  Ðwas€rendered€specifically€to€remedy€Cox's€pre„bankruptcy€contemptÐ !l" Ðof€the€court's€statutory€injunction.€€For€that€award€to€beÐ È"$ Ðessentially€nullified,€leaving€the€Advest€IRA€in€the€hands€ofÐ t$Ä& Ðâ âDavis's€ex„spouse,€is€to€reject€the€obvious€intentions€of€the€MaineÐ  &p!( Ðlegislature€that€the€divorce€court's€equitable€division€here€beÐ ° Ðdispositive€as€between€the€divorcing€spouses.׃;×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú9Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð \¬ Ðâ âà ` àTo€be€sure,€the€issue€is€ultimately€one€of€federalÐ X Ðbankruptcy€law,€but€federal€bankruptcy€law€makes€the€question€ofÐ ´  Ðwhat€property€to€include€in€Cox's€bankruptcy€estate€dependent€uponÐ ` ° Ðstate€law,€and€we€think€a€Maine€court€would€rule,€on€these€facts,Ð  \  Ðthat,€prior€to€bankruptcy,€Cox€held€the€Advest€IRA€upon€aÐ ¸  Ðconstructive€trust€for€Davis.€€òòSeeóó€òòinfraóó.€€This€is€not€a€case€whereÐ d´  Ðit€can€be€said€that€Davis€has€failed€to€avail€herself€in€a€timelyÐ `  Ðfashion€of€an€available€legal€attachment€remedy€that€could€haveÐ ¼  Ðsheltered€her€interest€in€the€marital€property€from€inclusion€inÐ h¸ ÐCox's€bankruptcy€estate.€€Nor€is€it€a€case€involving€creditorÐ d Ðinterests€other€than€such€as€may€be€said€to€exist€between€theÐ À Ðdivorcing€couple€themselves,€Davis€and€Cox.€€The€question€under€theÐ l¼ Ðfederal€bankruptcy€law€is€whether€Davis€held,€òòunder€state€lawóó,€aÐ h Ðviable€equitable€interest€of€her€own€in€the€Advest€IRA€at€the€timeÐ Ä Ðof€the€bankruptcy€petition.€€òòSeeóó€òòButneróó,€440€U.S.€at€54.€€On€allÐ pÀ  Ðthese€facts,€we€believe€she€did.Ð !l" Ðà ` àWe€think€a€Maine€court€would€hold,€in€these€facts€andÐ ° Ðcircumstances,€that€at€the€time€of€bankruptcy,€Cox€held€the€AdvestÐ \¬ ÐIRA€upon€a€constructive€trust€for€Davis,€with€the€precise€scope€ofÐ X Ðher€beneficial€interest€to€be€ultimately€determined€by€the€divorceÐ ´  Ðcourt.€€We€believe€that€the€existence€of€this€equitable€interestÐ ` ° Ðsufficed€under€section€541(d)€of€the€Bankruptcy€Code€to€remove€theÐ  \  ÐAdvest€IRA€from€Cox's€bankruptcy€estate,€subject€to€finalÐ ¸  Ðdisposition€by€the€Maine€divorce€court.€€It€is€commonplace€thatÐ d´  Ðwhere€legal€remedies€are€inadequate,€they€may€be€supplemented€byÐ `  Ðappropriate€equitable€ones.€€òòSeeóó€òòStantonóó€v.€òòTrustees€of€St.€JosephÐ ¼  ÐCollegeóó,€233€A.2d€718,€723„24€(Me.€1967).€€We€find€the€legalÐ h¸ Ðremedies€inadequate€here.€€Ð d Ðà ` àOur€dissenting€colleague€speculates€that€Davis€couldÐ À Ðconceivably€achieve€some€measure€of€future€relief€if,€for€example,Ð l¼ Ðthe€bankruptcy€court€were€to€be€prevailed€upon€to€treat€her€claimÐ h Ðfor€$65,250€as€nondischargeable.€€But€even€so€the€likelihood€ofÐ Ä Ðmeaningful€relief,€having€in€mind€the€€costs€of€further€litigationÐ pÀ  Ðin€the€bankruptcy€arena€and€Cox's€intransigence,€seems€slight€atÐ !l" Ðbest.€€We€are€far€less€optimistic€than€our€dissenting€colleague€thatÐ È"$ Ðrelitigation€of€the€divorce€equities€in€a€federal€bankruptcyÐ t$Ä& Ðtribunal€would€provide€succor€to€Davis.Ð  &p!( Ðà ` àConstructive€and€resulting€trusts€are€traditionalÐ Ì'#* Ðconstructs€utilized€by€courts,€including€those€in€Maine,€to€avoidÐ x)È$, Ðunjust€enrichment€and€other€forms€of€injustice€that€would€resultÐ $+t&. Ðfrom€allowing€the€legal€owner€to€benefit€from€the€property.€€òòSeeóó€Ð ° ÐòòThomasóó€v.€òòFalesóó,€577€A.2d€1181,€1183€(Me.€1990);€òòsee€alsoóó€òòIn€reÐ \¬ ÐQuestions€Submitted€by€the€United€States€District€Court€in€Imel€v.Ð X ÐUnited€Statesóó,€517€P.2d€1331,€1335€(Colo.€1974)€("Upon€and€afterÐ ´  Ðfiling€the€[divorce]€action€the€rights€of€the€wife€are€analogous€toÐ ` ° Ðthose€of€a€wife€who€can€establish€a€resulting€trust€.€.€.€.")€òòcitedÐ  \  Ðinóó€òòFournieróó,€376€A.2d€at€102.€€For€marital€property€like€the€AdvestÐ ¸  ÐIRA,€to€pass€through€Cox's€bankruptcy€estate€so€as€ultimately€toÐ d´  Ðfrustrate€the€decree€of€the€Maine€divorce€court€and€benefit€CoxÐ `  Ðexclusively€at€the€expense€of€his€former€spouse€and€in€derogationÐ ¼  Ðof€the€divorce€decree,€is€the€very€sort€of€inequity€such€devicesÐ h¸ Ðhave€been€utilized€to€prevent.€€Here,€following€Cox's€violation€ofÐ d Ðthe€statutory€injunction,€the€Maine€court€issued€on€May€24,€2999,Ð À Ðprior€to€bankruptcy,€a€further€express€order€forbidding€him€to€drawÐ l¼ Ðdown€the€IRA's€and€other€liquid€assets€„„€an€order€he€also€proceededÐ h Ðto€violate.€Ð Ä Ðà ` àSince€our€decision€hinges,€in€particular,€upon€theÐ pÀ  Ðexistence€of€the€pre„bankruptcy€orders,€Cox's€disobedience€then,€andÐ !l" Ðthe€fact€the€$65,250€IRA€award€was€to€redress€the€loss€to€DavisÐ È"$ Ðcaused€by€that€misconduct,€our€decision€can€be€said€to€rest€upon€theÐ t$Ä& Ðremedial€theory€of€constructive€trust.€€òòSeeóó€Restatement€ofÐ  &p!( ÐRestitution€ðð€160€et€seq.€(1937).€€But€the€concept€of€resultingÐ Ì'#* Ðâ âtrust€is€analogous€also.Ð x)È$, Ðà ` àThe€creation€of€a€resulting€trust€protects€those€whoÐ ° Ðâ âcontribute€toward€the€acquisition€of€property€against€the€prospectÐ \¬ Ðof€losing€it€to€a€second€party€who€took€title€in€the€transaction.€Ð X ÐòòSeeóó€Restatement€(Second)€of€Trusts€ðð€440€(1959).€€The€party€for€whomÐ ´  Ðthe€resulting€trust€is€created€need€not€have€made€a€monetaryÐ ` ° Ðcontribution€to€acquire€the€property€„„€any€contribution€of€servicesÐ  \  Ðor€property€may€entitle€her€to€a€beneficial€interest€in€theÐ ¸  Ðproperty.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€at€ðð€455.€€Thus,€it€is€appropriate€to€find€aÐ d´  Ðtrust€analogous€to€a€resulting€trust€in€favor€of€a€spouse€who€mayÐ `  Ðsubsequently€be€found€by€the€divorce€court€to€have€contributedÐ ¼  Ðmoney,€property,€or€services€during€the€course€of€a€marriage€and,Ð h¸ Ðas€a€consequence,€to€be€equitably€entitled€to€receive€all€or€partÐ d Ðof€the€property€upon€division.€€òòBakeróó,€444€A.2d€at€985;€òòseeÐ À Ðgenerallyóó€Restatement€(Second)€of€Trusts€ðððð€442„43€&€455€(1959).€Ð l¼ ÐThe€Supreme€Judicial€Court€of€Maine€has€been€willing,€albeit€onÐ h Ðdifferent€facts,€to€impose€a€resulting€trust€in€the€context€of€theÐ Ä Ðdistribution€of€non„marital€property.€€òòSeeóó€òòGrishmanóó€v.€òòGrishmanóó,€407Ð pÀ  ÐA.2d€9,€12€n.7€(Me.€1979);€òòsee€generallyóó€Restatement€(Second)€ofÐ !l" ÐTrusts€ðð€440€et€seq.€(1959).€€That€it€would€be€willing€to€protectÐ È"$ Ða€spouse's€interest€in€marital€property€in€these€circumstances€seemsÐ t$Ä& Ðonly€reasonable.€€In€any€event,€Cox's€contemptuous€misuse€of€maritalÐ  &p!( Ðassets€prior€to€bankruptcy,€including€those€from€the€Advest€IRAÐ Ì'#* Ðâ âitself,€in€defiance€of€the€court's€injunction,€warrants€the€findingÐ x)È$, Ðof€a€constructive€trust€in€order€to€protect€Davis's€interest€in€theÐ ° Ðproperty.Ð \¬ Ðâ âà ` àAs€previously€said,€we€need€not€go€so€far€as€toÐ X Ðdetermine,€as€Davis€encourages€us€to€do,€that€the€Supreme€JudicialÐ ´  ÐCourt€of€Maine€would€broadly€infer€from€the€design€and€structure€ofÐ ` ° Ðthe€Maine€divorce€statute€that,€upon€commencement€of€every€divorceÐ  \  Ðaction,€each€spouse€automatically€acquires€an€equitable€interest€inÐ ¸  Ðthe€other€spouse's€separately€held€assets€of€whatever€kind€„„€anÐ d´  Ðinterest€sufficient€to€block€transfer€to€a€subsequent€bankruptcyÐ `  Ðtrustee€of€property€the€latter€individually€owns.׃5×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú10Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Such€anÐ ¼  Ðinference€would€arguably€be€consistent€with€the€partnership€theoryÐ h¸ Ðof€marriage€adopted€by€the€Maine€legislature,€since€it€would€resultÐ d Ðin€treating€marital€property€like€"partnership€property"€in€aÐ À Ðbusiness€partnership€or€"community€property"€in€a€community€propertyÐ l¼ Ðstate.€€òòSeeóó€òòCarteróó,€419€A.2d€at€1021.€€Courts€have€held€thatÐ h Ðpartnership€property€itself€does€not€become€property€of€anÐ Ä Ðindividual€partner's€bankruptcy€estate.€€òòSeeóó€òòMcGahrenóó€v.€òòGrayóó€(òòInÐ pÀ  Ðre€Weissóó),€111€F.3d€1159,€1166€(4th€Cir.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€522€U.S.Ð ° Ð950€(1997).€€€While€the€debtor's€interest€in€the€partnership€isÐ \¬ Ðincluded€in€the€estate,€the€assets€held€by€the€partnership€itselfÐ X Ðare€not.€€òòId.óó€€If€these€principles€were€to€be€applied€to€the€currentÐ ´  Ðcase,€only€Cox's€undeclared€interest€in€marital€property€wouldÐ ` ° Ðbecome€part€of€the€bankruptcy€estate.€€òòSeeóó€òòTidwellóó€v.€òòCent.€Savs.Ð  \  ÐBankóó€(òòIn€re€Huntóó),€154€B.R.€1016,€1023€(Bankr.€M.D.€Ga.€1993)Ð ¸  Ð(noting€that€trustee's€only€interest€in€partnership€property€was€theÐ d´  Ðright€to€demand€partner's€share€after€an€accounting€and€payment€ofÐ `  Ðpartnership€liabilities).Ð ¼  Ðà ` àThe€particular€circumstances€of€this€case,€however,Ð h¸ Ðrender€it€unnecessary€for€us€to€make€such€an€extensive€pronouncementÐ d Ðregarding€the€scope€of€Maine€law.׃,×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú11Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€All€we€need€hold€here€is€thatÐ À Ðwhere€one€spouse€held€title€to€marital€property€that,€as€a€practicalÐ l¼ Ðmatter,€was€exempt€from€attachment,€and€where€the€specific€facts€andÐ h Ðequities€were€such€as€have€been€described,€the€non„owner€spouse€mayÐ Ä Ðclaim€to€have€held€an€undeclared€beneficial€interest€in€the€propertyÐ pÀ  Ðawarded€by€the€divorce€court,€her€interest€having€been€held€for€herÐ !l" Ðprior€to€bankruptcy€upon€a€constructive€trust€by€the€owner„spouseÐ È"$ Ðuntil€such€time€as€the€divorce€decree€became€final€and€the€maritalÐ ° Ðassets€were€divided.€€This€beneficial€interest,€the€scope€of€whichÐ \¬ Ðwas€ultimately€determined€by€the€state€court€when€dividing€theÐ X Ðmarital€property,€was€excluded€from€the€bankruptcy€estate€byÐ ´  Ðoperation€of€11€U.S.C.€ðð€541(d).€€òòCompareóó€òòIn€re€Perryóó,€131€B.R.€atÐ ` ° Ð768€(excluding€from€the€bankruptcy€estate€under€Massachusetts€lawÐ  \  Ðand€ðð€541(d)€a€spouse's€beneficial€interest€in€marital€propertyÐ ¸  Ðfound€to€be€held€in€a€"constructive€trust"€by€the€debtor„spouse).€Ð d´  ÐOur€conclusion€is€consistent€with€the€Maine€legislature's€adoptionÐ `  Ðof€the€partnership€theory€of€marriage€and€the€powers€it€has€grantedÐ ¼  Ðto€the€state€courts,€as€well€as€the€powers€those€courts€inherentlyÐ h¸ Ðretain,€to€protect€and€divide€the€marital€property.€€òòSeeóó€Me.€Rev.Ð d ÐStat.€Ann.€tit.€19„A,€ðð€903;€òòid.óó€at€ðð€953.€€Ð À Ðà ` àUnder€this€analysis,€Davis€obtained€an€undeclaredÐ l¼ Ðbeneficial€interest€in€the€Advest€IRA€at€the€time€the€divorceÐ h Ðpetition€was€filed.€€Although€the€IRA€was€titled€in€Cox's€name,€onceÐ Ä Ðthe€divorce€action€commenced,€he€held€the€IRA€in€trust€pending€theÐ pÀ  Ðstate€court's€order€dividing€the€marital€property.€€Davis'sÐ !l" Ðbeneficial€interest€to€the€extent€ultimately€awarded€to€her€did€notÐ È"$ Ðbecome€a€part€of€the€bankruptcy€estate.€€Ð t$Ä& Ðà ` àWe€add€that,€for€purposes€of€this€case,€we€need€not€worryÐ  &p!( Ðâ âabout€whether€the€trustee's€strong€arm€powers€under€11€U.S.C.€ðð€544Ð Ì'#* Ðcut€off€Davis's€beneficial€interest€in€the€Advest€IRA.׃A×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú12Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€thisÐ ° Ðâ âcase,€the€trustee€did€not€attempt€to€avoid€Davis's€interest€in€theÐ \¬ ÐAdvest€IRA€and,€in€fact,€wholly€supported€the€award.€€Thus,€thisÐ X Ðcase€can€be€distinguished€from€those€cases€in€which€the€courts€haveÐ ´  Ðconcluded€that€the€filing€of€a€bankruptcy€petition€cut€off€theÐ ` ° Ðunrecorded€equitable€rights€of€a€non„debtor€spouse.׃E×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú13Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€this€case,Ð  \  Ðonce€the€divorce€judgment€dividing€the€property€became€final,€DavisÐ ¸  Ðwas€free€to€execute€the€judgment€and€claim€her€beneficial€interestÐ d´  Ðin€the€Advest€IRA.Ð `  ÐÓ€ 1(*ù88>ÓØ! !ØÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýò òÝ‚3£r ÝÔ2*ùÔÚ  ÚCÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0 ` àÝ  ÝEscrow€Accountsó ó݃3£r ¢ ݌м ` (#` (# ÐŒÝ  Ýà ` àMr.€Cox€appeals€from€the€bankruptcy€court's€ruling€thatÐ „Ô Ðthe€funds€held€in€escrow€were€not€property€of€the€estate€and€couldÐ 0€ Ðbe€disbursed€according€to€the€divorce€judgment.€€The€divorce€courtÐ Ü, Ðordered€that€funds€held€in€the€Lawrason€Account€and€the€RidgeÐ ° ÐAccount€be€used€to€pay€certain€tax€debts€and€a€joint€mortgageÐ \¬ Ðserviced€by€Key€Bank.׃B×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú14Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€the€proceedings€below,€the€trusteeÐ X Ðopposed€implementation€of€the€divorce€judgment€to€the€extent€thatÐ ´  Ðit€ordered€funds€from€the€Lawrason€Account€to€pay€pre„petitionÐ ` ° Ðcreditors.€€The€trustee€argued€that€the€Lawrason€Account€should€beÐ  \  Ðturned€over€to€the€estate€and€used€to€pay€the€creditors€accordingÐ ¸  Ðto€the€distribution€scheme€set€forth€in€the€Bankruptcy€Code.€€CoxÐ d´  Ðalso€opposed€the€implementation€of€the€divorce€judgment€as€itÐ `  Ðrelated€to€the€escrow€accounts.€€Unlike€the€trustee,€however,€CoxÐ ¼  Ðdid€not€contend€that€the€escrow€account€could€not€be€used€to€pay€theÐ h¸ Ðtax€debts.€€He€argued€only€that€Key€Bank,€as€a€general,€unsecuredÐ d Ðcreditor,€should€not€be€paid€outside€of€priorities€set€forth€in€theÐ À ÐBankruptcy€Code.€Ð l¼ Ðà ` àThe€bankruptcy€court€concluded€that€the€funds€held€inÐ h Ðescrow€were€not€property€of€the€estate€and€could€be€distributed€inÐ Ä Ðaccordance€with€the€divorce€judgment.׃Cì ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú15Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€bankruptcy€courtÐ pÀ  Ðreasoned€that€as€of€the€petition€date,€Cox's€interest€in€the€fundsÐ ° Ðwas€a€"contingent€one,€depending€on€the€divorce€court'sÐ \¬ Ðdetermination€regarding€their€disposition."€€According€to€theÐ X Ðbankruptcy€court,€the€state€court€order€for€escrow€of€the€funds€heldÐ ´  Ðby€Lawrason€and€Ridge€placed€the€funds€in€òòcustodiaóó€òòlegisóó€andÐ ` ° Ð"operated,€effectively,€as€an€attachment€of€those€funds,"€therebyÐ  \  Ðsecuring€Davis's€claim€pending€entry€of€the€divorce€decree.€Ð ¸  Ðà ` àTo€determine€what€interest,€if€any,€Cox€had€in€the€fundsÐ d´  Ðheld€by€order€of€the€court€and€thus€what€interest€passed€to€theÐ `  Ðbankruptcy€estate,€we€must€look€to€Maine€law.€€The€bankruptcy€courtÐ ¼  Ðrelied€on€Maine€law€regarding€court„appointed€custodians€to€supportÐ h¸ Ðits€decision.€€Under€Maine€law,€when€a€court€in€equity€appoints€aÐ ° Ðreceiver,€the€title€to€the€property€vests€in€the€receiver€and€isÐ \¬ Ðheld€in€òòcustodiaóó€òòlegisóó€until€it€is€disposed€of€by€the€receiver€inÐ X Ðcompliance€with€an€order€of€that€court.€€òòSeeóó€òòHazzardóó€v.€òòWestviewÐ ´  ÐGolf€Club,€Inc.óó,€217€A.2d€217,€223€(Me.€1966);€òòCobbóó€v.€òòCamden€Savs.Ð ` ° ÐBankóó,€76€A.€667€(Me.€1909);€òòLittlefieldóó€v.€òòMaine€Cent.€R.R.€Co.óó,€71Ð  \  ÐA.€657,€660€(Me.€1908).€€This€includes€money€collected€by€an€officerÐ ¸  Ðof€the€court.€€òòSeeóó€òòHardyóó€v.€òòTiltonóó,€68€Me.€195€(1878).€€Title€vestsÐ d´  Ðin€the€receiver€upon€his€or€her€appointment.€€òòCobbóó,€76€A.€667Ð `  Ð(stating€"the€decree€of€appointment€ipso€facto€vests€the€title€toÐ ¼  Ðthe€[property]€in€the€receiver").€€Ð h¸ Ðà ` àThe€court€here€appointed€the€parties'€attorneys€to€holdÐ d Ðcertain€funds€in€escrow€pending€the€division€of€the€marital€assets.€Ð À ÐThe€attorneys€were€appointed€to€safeguard€the€property€to€prevent€Ð l¼ ÐCox€from€continuing€to€dissipate€the€funds€in€violation€of€a€courtÐ h Ðorder.€€When€the€state€court€directed€the€attorneys€to€place€theÐ Ä Ðmoney€in€escrow€accounts€and€to€disburse€the€money€only€upon€anÐ pÀ  Ðorder€of€the€court,€the€funds€were€placed€in€òòcustodiaóó€òòlegisóó€and€CoxÐ !l" Ðwas€divested€of€legal€title€of€the€funds€and€title€passed€to€theÐ È"$ Ðattorneys€as€officers€of€the€court.׃D×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú16Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Рt$Ä& Ðà ` àAs€a€result,€the€funds€held€in€òòcustodiaóó€òòlegisóó€did€notÐ ° Ðpass€into€the€bankruptcy€estate€upon€the€filing€of€the€bankruptcyÐ \¬ Ðpetition.€€As€noted€by€the€bankruptcy€court,€at€the€commencement€ofÐ X Ðthe€bankruptcy€proceeding,€Cox€held€just€a€contingent€interest€toÐ ´  Ðthe€property€held€in€òòcustodiaóó€òòlegisóó,€subject€to€the€divorce€court'sÐ ` ° Ðdisposition€of€the€property.€€Thus,€only€Cox's€contingent€interestÐ  \  Ðbecame€property€of€the€estate.€Ð ¸  Ðà ` àCox€contends€that€the€escrow€funds€could€not€have€beenÐ d´  Ð"effectively€attached"€as€the€bankruptcy€court€concluded€because€theÐ `  Ðmajority€of€the€funds€were€exempt€from€attachment€under€Maine€law.€Ð ¼  ÐAs€a€result,€Cox€argues,€the€exempt€property€in€the€escrow€fundsÐ h¸ Ðpassed€unencumbered€into€the€bankruptcy€estate€when€he€filed€hisÐ d Ðpetition.€€Cox's€argument€is€flawed.€€While€under€Maine€law€certainÐ À Ðproperty€is€exempt€from€attachment,€14€M.R.S.A.€ðð€4422,€the€propertyÐ l¼ Ðat€issue€here€was€not€attached.€€It€is€true€that€the€bankruptcyÐ h Ðcourt€said€the€property€was€"effectively€attached"€when€it€wasÐ Ä Ðplaced€in€òòcustodiaóó€òòlegisóó,€but€it€was€not€òòactuallyóó€attached.€€TheÐ pÀ  Ðbankruptcy€court€was€merely€analogizing€property€held€in€òòcustodiaóóÐ !l" Ðòòlegisóó€for€the€benefit€and€protection€of€an€individual€to€thatÐ È"$ Ðindividual's€attaching€of€the€property€in€a€hypothetical€situationÐ t$Ä& Ðto€secure€a€debt.€€But€unlike€a€mere€attachment,€the€court'sÐ  &p!( Ðdecision€to€place€the€property€in€òòcustodiaóó€òòlegisóó€divested€Cox€ofÐ Ì'#* Ðlegal€title€and€left€him€with€only€a€contingent€right€to€theÐ ° Ðproperty.€Ð \¬ ÐÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýò òÝ‚3£I%ÝÔ2*ùÔÚ  ÚDÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0 ` àÝ  ÝConclusionó ó݃3£I%y%ÝŒÐX` (#` (# ÐŒÝ  Ýà ` àThe€bankruptcy€court's€order€that€the€escrow€funds€couldÐ Ð  Ðbe€disbursed€as€stated€in€the€divorce€judgment€is€òòò òaffirmedó óóó.€€TheÐ | Ì Ðbankruptcy€court's€order€denying€the€disbursement€of€the€Advest€IRAÐ D ”  Ðto€Davis€as€described€in€the€divorce€decree€is€òòò òreversedó óóó€and€the€caseÐ ð@  Ðis€òòò òremandedó óóó€to€the€bankruptcy€court€for€proceedings€consistent€withÐ ¸  Ðthis€opinion.Ð €Ð  ÐÓ  Óò òDissenting€Opinion€follows.Ð ,| Ðó óÓ  ÓÐ  ôD ÐÑ8€P®DPXXdÖ XXdÖ8Ñà ` àò òCYR,€òòSenior€Circuit€Judge,€dissentingóó.ó ó€€After€apparentlyÐ ° Ðaccepting€the€bankruptcy€court's€cogent€interpretation€of€theÐ xÈ Ðapplicable€legal€principles,€òòseeóó€òòIn€re€Coxóó,€274€B.R.€13,€26„30Ð $t Ð(Bankr.€D.€Me.€2002),׃"×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú17Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€the€majority€predicates€its€reversal€uponÐ Ð  Ðthe€contention€that€the€particular€facts€of€this€case€warrantÐ | Ì Ðextraordinary€equitable€relief€„€òòviz.óó,€the€impressment€of€aÐ ( x  Ðconstructive€or€resulting€trust€upon€the€otherwise€exempt€Advest€IRAÐ Ô$  Є€so€as€to€preclude€Cox€from€unjustly€and€unilaterally€retainingÐ €Ð  Ðmarital€property€which€rightly€belonged€to€the€joint€marital€estate.€Ð ,|  ÐAs€its€tenuous€prediction€of€Maine€law€is€improvident€and€itsÐ Ø( Ðrecourse€to€equitable€relief€entirely€unnecessary,€I€respectfullyÐ „Ô Ðdissent.Ð 0€ Ðà ` àAs€the€majority€must€concede,€no€Maine€case€law€eitherÐ Ü, Ðexplicitly€or€implicitly€holds€that€a€cognizable€legal€or€equitableÐ ˆØ Ðproperty€interest€in€a€marital€asset€„€held€exclusively€in€the€nameÐ 4„ Ðof€one€spouse€„€vests€in€both€spouses€òòinstanteróó€simply€upon€theÐ à0 Ðfiling€of€a€divorce€petition,€rather€than€upon€entry€of€a€finalÐ ŒÜ  Ðdecree€of€legal€separation€or€divorce.€€Moreover,€arguably€at€least,Ð 8!ˆ" Ðsome€Maine€decisional€law€implies€quite€the€opposite.€€òòSeeóó€òòLongóó€v.Ð ä"4$ ÐòòLongóó,€697€A.2d€1317,€1321€(Me.€1997)€("The€'marital€property'Ð ° Ðdesignation€grants€òònoóó€òòpresentóó€òòrightsóó€in€the€property€òòduringóó€òòtheóóÐ \¬ Ðòòmarriageóó.")€(emphasis€added).׃$×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú18Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀РX Ðà ` àThe€majority€predicates€its€construction€upon€a€presumedÐ ´  Ðlegislative€intent€„€motivating€the€1972€amendment€to€the€MaineÐ ` ° Ðdivorce€statute€„€to€accord€divorcing€spouses€"more"€protection€fromÐ  \  Ðdivestments€of€property€jointly€acquired€during€the€marriage.€Ð ¸  ÐAlthough€this€is€so,€the€operative€question€is€how€far€the€MaineÐ d´  ÐLegislature€intended€to€go€in€according€"more"€protections.€€TheÐ `  Ðpre„1972€Maine€statute€accorded€overwhelming€weight€to€a€single,Ð ¼  Ðformalistic€criterion€„€òòviz.óó,€which€spouse€is€the€named€titleholderÐ h¸ Ðof€the€property€at€issue€„€and€the€amended€divorce€statuteÐ d Ðundeniably€accords€more€protection€to€the€non„titleholder€spouse€byÐ À Ðeven€including€such€separately„held€property€in€the€marital€estate,Ð l¼ Ðand€by€directing€the€divorce€court€to€distribute€separately„heldÐ h Ðproperty€to€either€spouse€as€well,€based€upon€its€consideration€ofÐ Ä Ðâ âa€panoply€of€equitable€considerations€aside€from€the€record€title.€Ð pÀ  Ðà ` àI€would€submit,€however,€that€the€majority€proceeds€uponÐ ° Ðâ âextremely€unstable€ground€in€extrapolating€òòfromóó€the€nebulousÐ \¬ Ðlegislative€purpose,€in€order€to€bolster€the€"partnership"€or€"jointÐ X Ðenterprise"€theory€of€marriage,€òòtoóó€the€majority's€thesis€that€theÐ ´  Ðlegislature€must€have€intended€other€„€yet€more€expansive€„€reforms.€Ð ` ° ÐòòCf.óó,€òòe.g.óó,€òòLyerlyóó€v.€òòIRSóó,€235€B.R.€401,€404€(W.D.N.C.€1998)€("TheÐ  \  Ð[North€Carolina]€legislature's€intent€.€.€.€was€to€create€a€rightÐ ¸  Ðto€equitable€distribution€of€the€marital€property,€which€had€notÐ d´  Ðexisted€up€to€that€time,€and€to€make€that€right€vest€at€the€time€ofÐ `  Ðfiling€for€divorce.€€[The€amended€divorce€statute]€did€not€createÐ ¼  Ðany€vested€rightsÔ  Ôòò€in€particular€marital€propertyóóÔ9Ô;€it€created€a€rightÐ h¸ Ðto€the€equitable€distribution€of€that€property,€whatever€a€courtÐ d Ðshould€determine€that€property€is.")€(emphasis€added).Ð À Ðà ` àThe€holdings€in€those€non„Maine€decisions€which€areÐ l¼ Ðcharacterized€by€the€majority€as€lending€"significant€support"€toÐ h Ðits€approach€„€òòe.góó.,€òòWalstonóó€v.€òòWalstonóó,€190€B.R.€66,€67„69Ð Ä Ð(E.D.N.C.€1995),€and€òòIn€re€Perryóó,€131€B.R.€763,€766„67€(Bankr.€D.Ð pÀ  ÐMass.€1991)€ð!ð€are€not€only€exceptionally€terse,€but€rest€upon€theÐ !l" Ðdubious€notion€that€a€constructive€or€resulting€trust€is€essentialÐ È"$ Ðto€the€achievement€of€an€"equitable"€result.€€òòButóó€òòseeóó€òòsupraóó€note€1Ð t$Ä& Ð(cataloging€dozens€of€judicial€decisions€rejecting€the€òòWalstonóó„òòPerryóóÐ  &p!( Ðòòrationaleóó).€€Normally,€we€may€resort€to€equitable€remedies,€such€asÐ Ì'#* Ðunjust€enrichment€and€its€concomitant€remedy€of€constructive€trust,Ð x)È$, Ðonly€after€concluding€that€the€complainant€has€or€will€have€noÐ $+t&. Ð"òòadequateóó"€òòremedyóó€òòatóó€òòlawóó.€€òòSeeóó€òòInfusaid€Corp.óó€v.€òòIntermedicsÐ ° ÐInfusaid,€Inc.óó,€739€F.2d€661,€668€(1st€Cir.€1984);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòStantonóóÐ \¬ Ðv.€òòTrustees€of€St.€Joseph's€Collegeóó,€233€A.2d€718,€723€(Me.€1967).€Ð X ÐThe€majority,€on€the€other€hand,€simply€posits€that€since€Davis€isÐ ´  Ðunable€to€attach€the€Advest€IRA€under€the€statute,€we€may€concludeÐ ` ° Ðòòinstanteróó€that€Davis€is€without€any€meaningful€recourse€other€thanÐ  \  Ða€constructive€trust.€€As€the€Bankruptcy€Code€explicitlyÐ ¸  Ðcontemplates€an€orderly€succession€of€remedies€in€these€sorts€ofÐ d´  Ðcases,€and€Davis€has€yet€to€exhaust€such€available€legal€remedies,Ð `  ÐI€respectfully€disagree.Ð ¼  Ðà ` àDavis€either€had,€has,€or€will€have€various€legalÐ h¸ Ðremedies€to€protect€her€unvested€rights€in€the€Advest€IRA.׃&×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú19Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€EvenÐ d Ðunder€the€rationale€adopted€by€the€bankruptcy€court,€the€filing€ofÐ À Ðthe€Cox€bankruptcy€petition€simply€terminated€Davis's€rights€in€theÐ l¼ Ðspecific€property€(òòviz.óó,€the€Advest€IRA),€òòseeóó€òòIn€re€Abmaóó,€215€B.R.Ð ° Ð148,€151€(Bankr.€N.D.€Ill.€1997)€("[N]on„debtor€spouse's€rights€inÐ \¬ Ðòòspecificóó€òòmaritalóó€òòpropertyóó€were€cut€off€by€the€bankruptcy€filing.")Ð X Ð(emphasis€added),€whereas€she€retains€a€$65,250€unsecured€claimÐ ´  Ðagainst€the€Cox€bankrupt€estate.€€òòSeeóó€òòDavisóó€v.€òòCoxóó,€274€B.R.€13,€23Ð ` ° Ð(Bankr.€D.€Me.€2002).€€Thus,€Davis€may€share€òòproóó€òòrataóó€in€anyÐ  \  Ðdividend€available€to€Cox's€unsecured€creditors.€€Nonetheless,€theÐ ¸  Ðmajority€implicitly€concludes€that€Davis€can€recover€but€a€pittance,Ð d´  Ða€speculative€prediction€at€best€given€the€mercurial€nature€ofÐ `  Ðbankruptcy€proceedings€at€such€an€early€juncture.€€òòSeeóó€òòIn€re€Anjumóó,Ð ¼  Ð288€B.R.€72,€73€n.1€(Bankr.€S.D.N.Y.€2003)€("[T]he€[non„debtorÐ h¸ Ðspouse's]€entitlement€to€share€in€the€debtor's€estate€has€no€valueÐ d Ðin€this€no„asset€case,€but€could€be€of€great€value€in€anotherÐ À Ðcase.").׃(×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú20Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð l¼ Ðà ` àFinally,€even€assuming€that€the€òòproóó€òòrataóó€share€realizedÐ h Ðby€Davis€were€to€prove€meager,€the€balance€of€her€$65,250€claimÐ Ä Ðwould€remain€presumptively€non„dischargeable€in€bankruptcy.€Ð pÀ  ÐBankruptcy€Code€ðð€523(a)(15)€excepts€from€discharge€any€debtÐ !l" ÐÓÓà8 ` ànot€of€the€kind€described€in€[ðð€523(a)](5)Ð È"$ Ðthat€is€incurred€by€the€debtor€in€the€courseÐ ž#î% Ðof€a€divorce€or€separation€or€in€connectionÐ t$Ä& Ðwith€a€separation€agreement,€divorce€decree€orÐ J%š ' Ðother€order€of€a€court€of€record,€aÐ  &p!( Ðâ âdetermination€made€in€accordance€with€State€orÐ ö&F") Ðterritorial€law€by€a€governmental€unit€unlessÐ ° Ðð!ð€Ð†Ö` -` - Ðâ âà0 ` àà8¨ ` (#` (#àà8¨ ਠàà(A)€à0Xˆˆàthe€debtor€does€not€haveÐ \¬ Ðthe€ability€to€pay€suchÐ 2‚ Ðdebt€from€income€orÐ X Ðproperty€of€the€debtor€notÐ Þ. Ðreasonably€necessary€to€beÐ ´  Ðexpended€for€theÐ Š Ú Ðmaintenance€or€support€ofÐ ` ° Ðthe€debtor€or€a€dependantÐ 6 †  Ðof€the€debtor€and,€if€theÐ  \  Ðdebtor€is€engaged€in€aÐ â 2  Ðbusiness,€for€the€paymentÐ ¸  Ðof€expenditures€necessaryÐ ŽÞ  Ðfor€the€continuation,Ð d´  Ðpreservation,€and€operationÐ :Š  Ðof€such€business;€or€Ð` XˆXˆ ÐÌà0 ` àà8¨ ` (#` (#àà8¨ ਠàà(B)€à0Xˆˆàdischarging€such€debt€wouldÐ ¼  Ðresult€in€a€benefit€to€theÐ ’â Ðdebtor€that€outweighs€theÐ h¸ Ðdetrimental€consequences€toÐ >Ž Ða€spouse,€former€spouse,€orÐ d Ðchild€of€the€debtor.€Ðê:XˆXˆ ÐÌÓÓ11€U.S.C.€ðð€523(a)(15).€€Ð –æ Ðà ` àThus,€Cox€would€have€to€carry€the€burden€of€proving€oneÐ B’ Ðof€these€two€criteria€in€order€to€obtain€a€discharge€of€theÐ î> Ðproperty„settlement€claim€held€by€Davis.€€òòSeeóó€òòIn€re€Lawrenceóó,€237Ð šê ÐB.R.€61,€83€(Bankr.€D.N.J.€1999).€€The€"ability€to€pay"€factor€inÐ F –! ÐBankruptcy€Code€ðð€523(a)(15)(A)€enables€the€bankruptcy€court€toÐ ò!B# Ðconsider€the€present€and€future€prospects€for€repayment€from€Cox'sÐ ž#î% Ðexpendable€property,€including€any€assets,€previously€acquired€inÐ J%š ' Ðcontravention€of€the€divorce€court€injunction,€which€remain€in€Cox'sÐ ö&F") Ðpossession,€òòseeóó€òòsupraóó€note€3,€or€from€Cox's€disposable€income,Ð ¢(ò#+ Ðincluding€future€wages.€€òòSeeóó€òòFeldmannóó€v.€òòFeldmannóó€(òòIn€re€Feldmannóó),Ð N*ž%- Ð220€B.R.€138,€145„46€(Bankr.€N.D.€Ga.€1998).€€Were€Cox€unable€toÐ ú+J'/ Ðsustain€this€substantial€burden€of€proof,€the€obligation€due€DavisÐ ° Ðwould€remain€undischarged,€notwithstanding€a€general€discharge€inÐ \¬ Ðbankruptcy.€€òòSeeóó€òòBowdenóó€v.€òòGrindleóó,€675€A.2d€968,€972„73€n.2€(Me.Ð X Ð1996)€(noting€that€one€element€of€"unjust€enrichment"€claim€isÐ ´  Ðinequitable€retention€of€benefit€"òòwithoutóó€òòpaymentóó")€(emphasisÐ ` ° Ðadded).€€Consequently,€the€significance€of€this€potential€post„Ð  \  Ðpetition€remedy€under€subsection€523(a)(15)€cannot€be€ignored.Ð ¸  Ðà ` àMoreover,€Bankruptcy€Code€ðð€523(a)(15)€imports€the€sameÐ d´  Ðtypes€of€equitable€considerations€and€balancing€requirements€asÐ `  Ðundergird€the€state„law€remedies€of€constructive€and€resultingÐ ¼  Ðtrusts,€in€many€respects€paralleling€the€"economic€misconduct"Ð h¸ Ðinquiry€mandated€under€the€Maine€divorce€statute's€scheme€forÐ d Ðequitable€distribution.€€òòSeeóó€òòsupraóó€note€3.€€Thus,€assuming€òòarguendoóóÐ À Ðthat€Cox€deliberately€engaged€in€financial€shenanigans€with€theÐ l¼ ÐAdvest€IRA,€he€cannot€anticipate€any€considerable€windfall€inÐ h Ðbankruptcy.׃)×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú21Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð Ä Ðà ` àThe€majority€proposes€that€the€bankruptcy€court€rulingÐ pÀ  Ðeffectively€nullifies€the€divorce€decree,€and€offends€the€well„Ð !l" Ðaccepted€principles€that€(i)€state€law€normally€defines€propertyÐ È"$ Ðrights€in€bankruptcy,€and€(ii)€the€state€divorce€court€possesses€aÐ t$Ä& Ðmore€specialized€expertise€to€undertake€the€equitable€distributionÐ ° Ðof€marital€property€than€does€a€federal€bankruptcy€court.€€But,€ofÐ \¬ Ðcourse,€the€bankruptcy€court€òòdidóó€òòdeferóó€to€the€state€court'sÐ X Ðexpertise€when€it€granted€the€first€motion€to€lift€the€automaticÐ ´  Ðstay€„€filed€by€Davis€„€while€at€the€same€time€explicitly€statingÐ ` ° Ðthat€"relief€from€the€stay€is€òònotóó€granted€to€implement€any€propertyÐ  \  Ðsettlement€absent€further€order€of€this€court."€(Emphasis€added.)Ð ¸  Ðà ` àJust€as€state€courts€possess€special€competence€inÐ d´  Ðdetermining€equitable€marital„property€distributions,€so€too€itÐ `  Ðcannot€be€gainsaid€that€they€possess€a€specialized€expertise€inÐ ¼  Ðdeclaring€state€law.€€In€determining€its€equitable€propertyÐ h¸ Ðdivision,€the€divorce€court€„€though€presumably€aware€that€Cox€couldÐ d Ðexempt€the€entire€IRA€account€pursuant€to€Maine€law€„€declined€theÐ À Ðtrustee's€invitation€to€reach€the€difficult€state„law€questionsÐ l¼ Ðpresently€before€us:€€whether€Davis€acquired€an€equitable€propertyÐ h Ðinterest€in€the€Advest€IRA€at€the€time€she€filed€for€divorce,€orÐ Ä Ðwhether€the€equities€in€this€case€mandated€that€Cox€hold€the€IRA€inÐ pÀ  Ðconstructive€or€resulting€trust€for€Davis.€€Davis€did€not€appealÐ !l" Ðfrom€the€divorce€judgment€on€the€ground€that€it€failed€adequatelyÐ È"$ Ðto€define€the€nature€of€her€state„law€rights€in€the€IRA.€€Once€theÐ t$Ä& Ðstate€court€has€pronounced€the€spouses'€respective€distributiveÐ  &p!( Ðrights,€the€Bankruptcy€Code€governs€the€ramifications€of€theseÐ Ì'#* Ðâ âpronouncements€in€the€context€of€the€Cox€bankruptcy€case.€Ð x)È$, Ðà ` àAlthough€one€may€sympathize€with€Davis€in€the€presentÐ ° Ðâ âpredicament,€as€well€as€with€the€majority's€conscientious€intentionÐ \¬ Ðto€minimize€its€impact,€the€intervention€of€a€bankruptcy€petitionÐ X Ðvery€frequently€entails€unfortunate€consequences€for€the€mostÐ ´  Ðinnocent€of€parties.€€Plainly€and€understandably,€then,€Davis€wouldÐ ` ° Ðprefer€the€more€immediate,€convenient,€and€predictable€remedyÐ  \  Ðafforded€by€a€constructive€or€resulting€trust.€€Yet€somewhat€lesserÐ ¸  Ðalternative€remedies€at€law€„€even€if€merely€adequate€„€takeÐ d´  Ðprecedence€over€equitable€remedies,€òòseeóó€òòInfusaid€Corp.óó,€739€F.2d€atÐ `  Ð668,€lest€equitable€relief€become€mere€redundant€surplusage.€Ð ¼  ÐAccordingly,€once€Congress€explicitly€prescribes€legal€remediesÐ h¸ Ðunder€the€Bankruptcy€Code€for€spouses€with€property€settlementÐ d Ðclaims,€courts€must€recognize€that€such€settlements€presumptivelyÐ À Ðare€to€be€treated€as€"claims"€in€bankruptcy.€€Consequently,€at€aÐ l¼ Ðminimum€the€courts€are€to€defer€any€decision€as€to€whether€to€seizeÐ h Ðupon€extraordinary€state„law€equitable€remedies€until€such€time€asÐ Ä Ða€spouse€has€unsuccessfully€exhausted€all€such€remedies.€€At€thatÐ pÀ  Ðjuncture,€the€bankruptcy€court€can€then€address€the€issueÐ !l" Ðcompetently.Ð È"$ Ðà ` àFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€I€would€hold€that€the€Cox€IRAÐ t$Ä& Ðbecame€part€of€the€bankrupt€estate€prior€to€the€Davis€propertyÐ  &p!( Ðsettlement.€€òòSeeóó€òòsupraóó€note€1.€€As€I€believe€the€bankruptcy€courtÐ Ì'#* Ðdecision€should€be€affirmed,€I€respectfully€dissent.Ð x)È$, Ð