With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". turn over the property, believing that § 43-45-4 allows him to exempt entirely the truck, boat, and legal claim against AIG by claiming one-dollar exemptions for each. We reject this contention. Unlike the two South Dakota statutes that provide absolute exemptions, the additional personal property exemption limits the debtor’s ability to claim exemptions to an aggregate value of $6,000 if the head of a family, or $4,000 if not the head of a family. Therefore, in claiming a one-dollar exemption in each of the truck, boat, and legal claim against AIG under § 43-45-4, Nessan simply utilized three dollars’ worth of the total value available for personal property exemptions. He did not exempt the property in its entirety. See, e.g., In re Ludwig, No. 01 — 40473 (Bankr.D.S.D. Oct. 25, 2001) (<HOLDING>); In re Hughes, 244 B.R. 805, 814

A: holding that a debt or could only exempt an item of property that exceeded the exemption limit by paying the difference between the value of the property and the exemption limit to the estate
B: holding that trustee could sell debtors vehicles to recover for the estate any equity that exceeded  43454s exemption limit
C: holding that the bankruptcy court did not err in finding bad faith and denying a debtors amended claim of exemption based upon evidence that the debtors undervalued their home in the schedules to reflect no equity
D: holding that debtors cannot claim an exemption in a homestead after trustee avoided the transfer of the property as a fraudulent conveyance because the transfer by the debtors was voluntary
B.