that “even a contingent, reversionary interest is included in a debtor’s estate under § 541”). Turning to whether turnover is appropriate under these circumstances, we first consider the statutory language which requires that the turnover target, here debtors, be “in possession, custody, or control, during the case, of property that the trustee may use, sell, or lease under [11 U.S.C. § ] 363.” 11 U.S.C. § 542(a). We agree with the BAP that, after filing their Chapter 7 petition and at least through the culmination of the turnover proceeding, debtors were never in “possession, custody, or control” of their contingent reversionary interest in the prepayment of their 2007 taxes. See Maggio v. Zeitz (In re Luma Camera Serv., Inc.), 333 U.S. 56, 64, 68 S.Ct. 401, 92 L.Ed. 476 (1948) (<HOLDING>). This fact alone dooms the trustee’s efforts.
holding that the primary condition of turnover relief is possession of existing chattels or their proceeds capable of being surrendered by the person ordered to do so holding that a condition subsequent presupposes an existing obligation that is to be defeated or forfeited if the condition is not fulfilled holding that a plea of title was not interposed where the person in possession answered that the party suing for possession was not the established owner of the premises holding in determining whether driver was insured under terms of policy exclusion of person using vehicle without a reasonable belief person was entitled to do so must be considered holding that the defendants possession of the firearm was not so fleeting as to warrant an instruction on temporary innocent possession