I have seen this issue come up on numerous listserves. Judge Mund explains why the answer is no.
In re Kenney, 1:10-bk-11635-GM (Bkrtcy, C. D. Cal. Nov, 2018)
Issue: Is a 522(f) appropriate to avoid a prepetition judgment lien when the debtor owned no real property on the petition date?
Holding: No. There is no lien to avoid.
Judge Mund
The debtors filed chapter 7 and got their discharge in 2010. At the time a creditor had a judgment against them and had recorded an abstract of judgment. They had no real property at the time. In 2018, they are trying to buy a house. They reopened their case and filed a Motion to Avoid Judgment Lien under 522(f).
Judge Mund denied the motion on the basis that there is/was no lien to avoid.
Because there is no valid lien to be avoided, Debtor is not entitled to the protections of 522(f). The Court recognizes that Debtor is trying to ensure that no encumbrance results from a pre-petition recorded abstract of judgment; such a result would have the absurd consequence of creating an unenforceable lien on property acquired post-petition, but only in the specific counties which the creditor recorded the abstract of judgment.