Debtors’ exemptions in the Cheboygan Property under § 522(d)(1) “are not properly claimed.” See Fed. R.Bankr.P. 4003(c); see also In re John, 459 B.R. 684, 689 (Bankr.E.D.Mich.2011) (citations omitted). The Court must construe exemptions liberally, in favor of the Debtors. See In re Hanh Hieu Dang, No. 11-10091, 2012 WL 2175778, at *2 (Bankr. W.D.Mich. June 13, 2012)(“Exemptions are to be liberally construed in favor of a debtor.”) (citing Menninger v. Schramm (In re Schramm), 431 B.R. 397, 400 (6th Cir. BAP 2010) and Fed. R. Bankr.P. 4003(c)). The Court must determine Debtors’ claimed exemptions as of the date they filed their bankruptcy petition. See id. (“Exemptions are determined as of the filing date.”); In re Buick, 237 B.R. 607, 609 (Bankr.W.D.Pa.1999) and cases cited therein (<HOLDING>). 2. The meaning of “residence” in § 522(d)(1)
holding that a debtors entitlement to an exemption under  522d1 is determined as of the filing date of  a bankruptcy petition holding that debtors could not exempt under  522d1 proceeds from the prepetition sale of their home holding one who claims tax exemption has burden of showing entitlement to exemption holding that the right of the debtor to claim property as exempt is generally determined on the facts as they exist on the date of the filing of the petition holding that a debtors  522d1 exemption was invalid when the debtor exempted proceeds from the prepetition sale of the debtors marital home which were paid to a judgment creditor with an attachment on the debtors interest in the home