as alimony, maintenance, or support, unless such liability is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support. 11 U.S.C. § 522(f)(1)(A). In the Owen decision, the United States Supreme Court held that a debtor could utilize the above quoted statute to avoid a judicial lien even though the debtor had claimed his homestead exempt under Florida law that specifically provided the exemption did not apply as to preexisting liens. Owen v. Owen, 500 U.S. 305, 111 S.Ct. 1833, 114 L.Ed.2d 350 (1991). The question is "not whether the lien impairs an exemption to which the debt- or is in fact entitled, but whether it impairs an exemption to which he would have been entitled but for the lien itself.” Owen, 500 U.S. at 310-11, 111 S.Ct. at 1836-37 (emphasis in the orig .N.D.Iowa 1992) (<HOLDING>). Parenthetically, this Court notes that the
holding that a chapter 13 debtor had standing to avoid a judgment lien to the extent of her exemption amount but not the entire judgment lien holding even though debtor would have been entitled to iowa homestead exemption but for former spouses iowa code section 59821 lien debtor could not avoid the lien because it attached to the homestead prior to or simultaneously with debtors acquisition of the interest in the homestead holding state courts authority under iowa code section 59821 not the lien created there under prevented debtor from claiming the iowa homestead exemption and therefore the debtor could not avoid the lien because the lien did not impair an exemption to which the debtor would have been entitled but for the lien holding that the lien bond releases the property from the lien but the lien is then secured by the bond holding that a state tax lien was not judicial lien arising from judgment such that it could be avoided in bankruptcy by a chapter 13 debtor