11 U.S.C. § 523

Section 523(a)(5) makes a debtor’s second mortgage obligation nondischargeable when the payments provide support by helping house the debtor’s former spouse and minor children.

Robbins v. Mizen (In Re Mizen) · filed 1987-03-20(a)(5)

For the above reasons, primarily the fact that the Plaintiff and the children are living in the house in question, the second mortgage payments are properly characterized as support, and are therefore nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts obligations that are actually in the nature of alimony from discharge.

Graves v. Hart (In Re Graves) · filed 1987-01-30(a)(5)

In conclusion, this Court holds as a matter of law that the Husband’s obligations under the above-referenced Marital Settlement Agreement are non-dischargeable because the obligations are “actually in the nature of alimony” pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

A debt for a child’s tuition is dischargeable when the creditor fails to show that it is in the nature of support.

Walton v. Motley (In Re Motley) · filed 1987-01-20(a)(5)

No evidence is presented, however, that Defendant’s debt to Plaintiffs set forth in the January 10, 1986 judgment is “in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support”. Consequently, Defendant’s debt to Plaintiffs is dischargeable under Section 523(a)(5), and the relief sought is denied.

Section 523(a)(4) and (a)(5) do not apply to postpetition payments that are the former spouse’s property.

Bankr. L. Rep. P 71,575 in Re Richard Laverne Chandler, Debtor. Richard Laverne Chandler v. Chandler · filed 1987-01-14(a)(4), (a)(5)

Since all of that amount, as we have held, is Mrs. Chandler’s property and reflects funds received after the bankruptcy petition was filed, 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4) and 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) are not applicable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts an agreement to indemnify a former spouse for joint debts from discharge when the agreement is in the nature of support.

MacDonald v. MacDonald (In Re MacDonald) · filed 1986-12-31(a)(5)

This court finds based upon a consideration of all the facts herein that the debtor’s agreement to indemnify and to hold the plaintiff harmless on account of joint obligations owed to First Jersey National Bank/South and Navy Federal Credit Union are in the nature of alimony, maintenance and support and therefore not discharged by the debtor’s discharge in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) does not expressly except attorney fees awarded in a divorce proceeding from discharge.

Miskovsky v. Skinner (In Re Skinner) · filed 1986-12-23(a)(5)

Section 523(a)(5) precludes from discharge payments “actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support.” It contains no explicit exception to discharge for attorney fees granted in a divorce proceeding.

Section 523(a)(5) treats a divorce debt as support when the parties intended it to meet a former spouse’s basic needs, including housing.

Bankr. L. Rep. P 71,535 in Re Brian Tibbetts Yeates, Debtor. Paulette B. Yeates v. Yeates · filed 1986-12-19(a)(5)

The spouse’s need for support is a very important factor in determining the intent of the parties. When the agreement is ambiguous, evidence that payment of the debt is necessary in order for the plaintiff to maintain daily necessities such as food, housing and transportation indicates that the parties intended the debt to be in the nature of support.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) permits discharge of divorce obligations that distribute property rather than provide alimony, maintenance, or support.

Markizer v. Economopoulos (In Re Markizer) · filed 1986-11-18(a)(5)(B)

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Final Judgment is hereby entered in favor of plaintiff, Moisés Markizer, and against defendant, Zoraida Markizer Economopoulos, and Moisés Markizer’s obligations under the Child Custody and Property Settlement Agreement entered into on January 24, 1986, and the March 7, 1986, modification thereto to pay $600 per week as an advance on the sale proceeds of Ardiyos Corporation, to maintain health insurance on Zorai-da Markizer Economopoulos and to maintain a life insurance policy, upon which Zoraida Markizer Economopoulos is a one-half beneficiary, are not in the nature of alimony, maintenance and support, but are distributions of property and as such are dischargeable pursuant to Section 523(a)(5)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts unpaid rehabilitative support from discharge when a separation agreement requires payments until a former spouse becomes employed.

McArtor v. Rowles (In Re Rowles) · filed 1986-10-31(a)(5)

The payments were to continue only until Plaintiff found gainful employment as a registered nurse. One need only look at the open-ended nature of Debtor’s obligations under the separation agreement to reach the logical conclusion that the obligations were included in the agreement as and for a rehabilitative form of “support” and that the parties intended the obligations to act as such.

Section 523(a)(5) makes an obligation to pay a spouse’s matrimonial counsel fees nondischargeable as alimony even when the spouses file jointly for bankruptcy.

Siegel v. Smith · filed 1986-10-09(a)(5)

The spouse’s subsequent filing for bankruptcy did not alter the nature of the husband’s obligation. Thus, the debt owed to appel-lee by appellant Robert Smith for counsel fees is non-dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce-related attorney fees from discharge when they are support, and the creditor bears the burden of proving that they are.

Hossinger v. Tackett (In Re Tackett) · filed 1986-10-21(a)(5)

As the plaintiff, Hossinger has the burden of proving that the debt is nondischargeable. ... In light of Hossinger’s failure to meet his burden of proof and this court’s strict construction in favor of the debtor’s fresh start, the court determines the debt for attorney fees to be dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Under the 1978 version of § 523(a)(5), genuine court-ordered spousal support is nondischargeable even when the support order is not embodied in a separation agreement, divorce decree, or property settlement agreement.

Shine v. Shine · filed 1986-10-06(a)(5)

In this appeal, we must determine whether an obligation incurred because of the failure to pay court-ordered support is dis-chargeable in bankruptcy where the support order was not explicitly embodied in “a separation agreement, divorce decree, or property settlement agreement,” the language of the bankruptcy statute then in effect, 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) (1978). ... We hold, therefore, that this support obligation is not dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a debtor’s assumption of a joint marital debt from discharge when the obligation is in the nature of alimony or support.

Pitzen v. Pitzen (In Re Pitzen) · filed 1986-09-22(a)(5)

The court finds, then, the debt to be in the nature of alimony and, therefore, is nondischargeable.

Under the 1983 version of § 523(a)(5), a voluntary agreement admitting paternity and establishing child support can create a nondischargeable obligation even without a court order.

Mullally v. Carter · filed 1986-09-22(a)(5)

We therefore reject Mullally’s argument that his obligation to support Jaime should not be excepted from discharge because it does not take the form of an order of court. Because the Agreement is evidence of a legitimate obligation to support a child of the debtor, we see no reason for excepting it from discharge simply because it did not arise in a manner expressly enumerated in the statute.

Section 523(a)(5) makes attorney’s fees and other costs incurred to regain custody of a child nondischargeable when they are directly related to a support obligation.

Hicks v. Hicks (In Re Hicks) · filed 1986-09-23(a)(5)

Applying the Sposa test together with the rationale set forth by the Gedeon court, this Court finds the $12,881.78 debt owed to plaintiff as compensation for attorney’s fees and other costs incurred while attempting to regain custody of the minor child to be a non-dischargeable debt under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a debt to a former spouse from discharge when the debt actually serves as support; a property division without a support purpose is dischargeable.

Barnett v. Barnett (In Re Barnett) · filed 1986-08-25(a)(5)

While, as noted, the state court decree is not necessarily dispositive on this issue, in the absence of any credible evidence that the judgment was granted for the purpose of providing Janet support, the Court must conclude that the debt in question is dis-chargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a divorce-related attorney fee debt from discharge when the debt is part of a property settlement rather than alimony, maintenance, or support.

Wadleigh v. Wadleigh (In Re Wadleigh) · filed 1986-08-25(a)(5)

The critical question for us is the nature of the obligation running to the counsel for the debtor’s former spouse. The facts of this case, supported by testimony of all parties and admitted exhibits, support a finding that the debt due Nikas by the debtor is in the nature of a property settlement, not for alimony, maintenance, or support, and thus is dischargeable under the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts attorney fees and costs awarded to enforce spousal support from discharge when they are in the nature of support.

Manners v. Manners (In Re Manners) · filed 1986-07-10(a)(5)

I find, therefore, the attorney fees and costs were awarded to the wife to enforce the Debtor’s support obligations, and were in the nature of support. Thus, each award of attorney fees is non-dischargeable under Section 523(a)(5) of the Code.

Under former § 523(a)(5)(B), a divorce debt that divided liabilities rather than providing support was dischargeable.

Williams v. Gurley (In Re Williams) · filed 1980-01-25(a)(5)(B)

This Court finds that the debt in question is not “actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support” within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(B) but arose from a division of debts and is therefore dischargeable in bankruptcy.

A debt that is actually in the nature of support is not discharged under the 1978 version of § 523(a)(5).

Carlile v. Fox (In Re Fox) · filed 1980-07-24(a)(5)

I find the obligation is in the nature of support for the Plaintiff and is not discharged.

Former § 523(a)(5)(B) required a court to look past a divorce decree’s label to determine whether an obligation was actually support.

Warner v. Warner (In Re Warner) · filed 1980-08-07(a)(5)(B)

This statutory mandate appears specifically to direct the Court not to take the recitations in a divorce decree as binding for the purpose of characterizing the nature of the debt under bankruptcy law.

Section 523(a)(5) permits discharge of marital debts assumed in a divorce agreement when the obligation divides debts rather than provides alimony, maintenance, or support.

Diers v. Diers (In Re Diers) · filed 1980-09-17(a)(5)

We reach the conclusion that they are by way of division of debts and therefore dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts an assumed debt from discharge when the obligation to pay it is in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support.

Matter of Sturgell · filed 1980-10-29(a)(5)

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the defendant’s responsibility to pay Associates Financial Services Company in connection with the parties’ Separation Agreement is in the nature of alimony, support and maintenance of the plaintiff, and therefore, the continued responsibility to the plaintiff for such payment is nondischargeable in bankruptcy.

Former § 523(a)(5)(B) did not treat a hold harmless promise as support merely because it appeared in a separation agreement.

Tope v. Tope (In Re Tope) · filed 1980-11-26(a)(5)(B)

The husband’s promise to hold the wife harmless does not automatically transform a division of property into a promise to provide alimony, maintenance or support.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce-decree debts from discharge when a debtor’s promise to pay and indemnify a former spouse is in the nature of support and the former spouse is liable for or has paid those debts.

Cleveland v. Cleveland (In Re Cleveland) · filed 1981-01-09(a)(5)

Absent any other record, this Bankruptcy Court holds that the paragraph in the divorce decree requiring Debtor to pay the various debts and to indemnify Plaintiff is an award by the state court of maintenance and support to Plaintiff, and any debt covered by the divorce decree for which Plaintiff is legally obligated to pay or has been forced to pay is excepted from Debtor’s discharge under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5)(B) makes an obligation to pay marital debts nondischargeable when the obligation is actually in the nature of support for a former spouse.

Sledge v. Sledge (In Re Sledge) · filed 1981-01-08(a)(5)(B)

For that reason paragraph 6 was added and provided that in addition to the aforesaid payment and in the nature of support to be paid by husband to wife, the debts were to be paid.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a divorce agreement’s hold-harmless obligation from discharge to the extent it pays alimony, maintenance, or support.

Miller v. Bankers Guarantee Title & Trust Co. (In Re Miller) · filed 1981-01-12(a)(5)

Debts resulting from an agreement by the debtor to hold the debtor’s spouse harmless on joint debts are nondischargeable to the extent that the agreement is in payment of alimony, maintenance, or support of the spouse, as determined under bankruptcy law considerations. ... Therefore, it is the conclusion of this court that the “hold harmless” provision in the Separation Agreement is not in the nature of support or alimony, but is in the nature of a property settlement which is dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) allows a spouse, former spouse, or child to enforce the support exception to discharge; an attorney owed fees directly lacks standing to do so.

Porter v. Gwinn (In Re Gwinn) · filed 1981-02-03(a)(5)

This Court believes that Judge Hayes’s reading of the legislative history behind Section 523(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code is correct. In particular, the Court is convinced that Congress never intended that third parties, such as the present Plaintiff, have standing to pursue the sort of obligation now in question.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) permits discharge of divorce-related debts arising from a division of property and debts rather than actual alimony, maintenance, or support.

Cartner v. Cartner (In Re Cartner) · filed 1981-02-19(a)(5)(B)

We find and conclude as did the Court in that case that the debts in question are not actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(B), but arose from a division of debts as well as a division of property and is therefore dis-chargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts an attorney fee award payable directly to a former spouse’s lawyer from discharge when the award is in the nature of support.

French v. Prante (In Re French) · filed 1981-03-12(a)(5)

In short, the assumption of the Prante obligation by the debtor provided his former spouse with added economic security and aided her in supporting herself and the children. It must therefore be considered in the nature of a support payment. ... Accordingly, the obligation owing by the debtor to Prante is non-dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5)(A) does not make child support arrearages dischargeable when the support judgment was assigned solely for collection.

Deblock v. Deblock (In Re Deblock) · filed 1981-05-11(a)(5)(A)

Therefore, it is the conclusion of this Court, as a court of equity, that the assignment of judgment by plaintiff to Andrews & Associates, Inc., L.P.A. was made solely for the purpose of collecting the child support arrearages owing by defendant and, therefore, the assignment of judgment does not come within the provisions of 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5)(A) and is nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a property settlement from discharge merely because it appears in a separation agreement; the creditor must prove the obligation is support.

Warren v. Taff (In Re Taff) · filed 1981-03-13(a)(5)

In addition, the stock transfer in issue is not conditioned on the death or remarriage of the plaintiff, but is payable to her or her estate in any event. Obligations which do not terminate on the death or remarriage of the obligee spouse and do not expressly or inferably relate to living expenses are more indicative of property settlements than support payments.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a divorce-related debt from discharge only if it is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support.

Brunson v. Payne (In Re Payne) · filed 1981-03-18(a)(5)

This Court finds that the payments, as set forth by the parties, are not actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support as set forth in 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) and that such are, therefore, dischargeable in these bankruptcy proceedings.

Section 523(a)(5) leaves property division obligations dischargeable and makes their classification a matter of federal law.

Dunn v. Dunn (In Re Dunn) · filed 1981-03-30(a)(5)

Under the former Act “obligations created by property settlements or division of property of the parties to a divorce action ... are dischargeable in bankruptcy, (citing authorities).” ... The successor Code section leaves this principle unchanged except for expressly making such determination a matter of federal rather than local law.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts attorney’s fees incurred to enforce child support from discharge when the fees are in the nature of support.

LaFleur v. LaFleur (In Re LaFleur) · filed 1981-04-10(a)(5)

Accordingly, this court finds that as to the attorney’s fees awarded to the wife in the contempt action only they are in the nature of child support and maintenance and are non-dischargeable. Ancillary obligations, such as attorney’s fees, must stand or fall with the primary debt when determining their nature for dischargeability purposes.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce-related attorney’s fees from discharge when they are in the nature of support and owed to a spouse, even if payment is made through the court clerk.

Lebamoff & Associates v. Gilbert (In Re Gilbert) · filed 1981-04-16(a)(5)

Accordingly, the Court hereby finds that the obligation for payment of the wife’s attorney is a debt to the spouse and is in the nature of support. Thus the $400.00 debt for attorney’s fees is nondischargeable under Section 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts spousal support debts from discharge, but an obligation to share mortgage payments on marital property pending its sale is dischargeable when it serves as a property settlement rather than support.

Frey v. Frey (In Re Frey) · filed 1981-04-16(a)(5)

A debt is not dischargeable in bankruptcy if it is a debt to a spouse for alimony to, maintenance for, or support of the spouse or child. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5). ... While defendant’s default is reprehensible, it is not a breach of an obligation of support or maintenance of his ex-wife. The debt arises out of defendant’s obligation under a property settlement agreement which is dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts obligations in the nature of support from discharge even when payment is owed to a third party; qualifying counsel fees and fees to enforce those obligations are also nondischargeable.

Romeo v. Romeo (In Re Romeo) · filed 1981-05-13(a)(5)

Plaintiff’s counsel’s contention that only alimony, maintenance or support owed directly to a spouse or dependent is nondis-chargeable under § 523[a][5] is without merit, apparently deriving from a misplaced reliance on the Senate Judiciary Committee Report accompanying the Senate bill S2266. ... Applying the foregoing principles to the circumstances here, the Court holds the debts in question and the counsel fees awarded by the state matrimonial court to be nondischargeable. Legal fees and costs expended by defendant spouse for enforcement of the nondischarged/nondischargeable debts are similarly held to be nondis-chargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts alimony obligations, including qualifying divorce-related attorney’s fees and periodic maintenance, from discharge, but does not except a payment for a spouse’s equity in real estate.

Brassard v. Brassard (In Re Brassard) · filed 1981-05-19(a)(5)

Thus we hold that the $1,050 awarded as attorney’s fees does constitute alimony within the meaning of § 523(a)(5) and is non-dischargeable. The $1,000 which constituted payment for the equity in the real estate is more in the nature of a commercial transaction in which value is paid for property. Thus it does not constitute “alimony” within the meaning of § 523(a)(5) and is dischargeable. ... In its outlines the requirements of Paragraph 6 appear to fall within the customary perimeter, and it is held to constitute alimony as that term is used in § 523(a)(5). The obligation to continue making payments of $100 per week is not discharged.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) makes an obligation nondischargeable when it is substantively spousal support, regardless of its label in a property settlement.

Obenshain v. Obenshain (In Re Obenshain) · filed 1981-06-17(a)(5)(B)

This Court finds that Clause V, reprinted above, sets forth an obligation which, though not designated alimony in form, is in substance in the nature of spousal support and is therefore nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce-related alimony, maintenance, and support debts from discharge, including mortgage payments intended to support a former spouse or child.

In Re Dennis Neil Maitlen, Bankrupt. Joyce A. Maitlen v. Maitlen · filed 1981-08-24(a)(5)

There is no dispute that if an obligation is a debt for alimony, maintenance, or support of a spouse or child in connection with a divorce decree, it is not dischargea-ble in bankruptcy. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts support obligations for children or former spouses from discharge, including additional support imposed by a state court that retained jurisdiction to modify its award.

In Re Danley · filed 1981-10-08(a)(5)

One such enumerated exception to discharge is a support obligation either for children or for a former spouse. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) (1978). The imposition of additional support obligations by a state court judge who has carefully retained jurisdiction to do so should be properly understood as just one more exception of those kinds of debts Congress considered more important than the fresh start.

Section 523(a)(5) covers support obligations to a debtor’s child who has reached the age of majority.

Harrell v. Sharp (In Re Harrell) · filed 1981-08-17(a)(5)

11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) did not limit the word “child” by prefacing it with the word “minor”. Accordingly, “child” as it is used in 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) includes a child of the debtor who has reached the age of majority.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce-related attorneys’ fees from discharge when they are payable directly to a former spouse and are in the nature of support.

Bishop v. Bishop (In Re Bishop) · filed 1981-08-18(a)(5)

Predicated on the aforesaid findings of fact and precepts of law, petitioner’s motion for summary judgment is denied and respondent’s claim for attorneys’ fees is declared nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce counsel fees from discharge when they are in the nature of support, even if payable directly to the attorney.

In Re Theodore W. Spong, Debtor. Raymond J. Pauley v. Spong · filed 1981-09-25(a)(5)

We conclude that it would be exalting form over substance to fail to treat appellee's agreement to pay his wife's counsel fee as a "debt ... to a spouse ... for alimony ... maintenance ..., or support", and that, therefore, it is nondischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts an obligation from discharge when it is in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support.

Newton v. Fontaine (In re Fontaine) · filed 1981-09-11(a)(5)

The Plaintiff has not produced any evidence to rebut the strong inference in this case that the Family Court order requiring the Defendant to pay the loan in question was not intended to be in the nature of alimony. ... The debt in question is discharged.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) makes payments that are actually for support nondischargeable even if a divorce decree calls them a property settlement and waives alimony.

Carrigg v. Carrigg (In Re Carrigg) · filed 1981-09-30(a)(5)(B)

Thus, a bankruptcy court may look beyond the four corners of the divorce decree or settlement agreement to make a finding that the payments were in the nature of alimony even where the divorce decree included a waiver of alimony. ... The payments, required in the case at bar, relating to living expenses and terminating on the death or remarriage of the plaintiff, appear to be payments in the nature of alimony, support or maintenance.

Section 523(a)(5) can make a parent's support debt nondischargeable when payment goes to a third party, so long as the duty is owed to the child.

Deeb v. Morris (In Re Morris) · filed 1981-09-28(a)(5)

Faced with a strong expression of policy, I am unable to indulge in such quixoticness; therefore, I conclude that § 523(a)(5) requires only that the duty of payment at issue be one which the child is owed as the offspring of the debtor-parent and not as a payee-creditor.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a debt from discharge when payment to a third party is actually support for a former spouse or children.

Mullins v. Mullins (In Re Mullins) · filed 1981-10-22(a)(5)

The apparent intent and purpose of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) is to prevent a debtor from discharging his responsibilities to an ex-spouse or children, even to the extent that such support was in the form a debt to be paid to a third party.

Section 523(a)(5) prevents discharge of a child-support judgment connected with a divorce decree, including a judgment for past-due support.

Beauchamp v. Graham (In Re Graham) · filed 1981-10-06(a)(5)

A “common law judgment” it may be, but it is also “in connection with” the divorce decree, which brings it within the terms of Sec. 523(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(5) permits discharge of a divorce-related attorney fee debt that is a division of debts rather than alimony, maintenance, or support.

Barnett & Lerner, Chartered v. King (In Re King) · filed 1981-10-28(a)(5)

This Court finds that the plaintiffs herein have not shown that the debt was substantively alimony, support or maintenance. Therefore, this debt is dischargeable under both § 523(a)(5)(A) and § 523(a)(5)(B) of Title 11 United States Code.

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a property-division debt from discharge when it is not alimony, maintenance or support.

Gabele v. Gabele (In Re Gabele) · filed 1981-11-12(a)(5)

11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5) excepts from discharge those debts to a former spouse which are for alimony, maintenance or support of the former spouse. ... Therefore, it is the conclusion of this Court that the unsecured portion of the debt owed to Plaintiff, Rhea Gabele, in the amount of $20,000.00 is dischargeable in bankruptcy as it is a division of property between the parties.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) excepts a debt labeled alimony from discharge only if it is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support.

Daviau v. Daviau (In Re Daviau) · filed 1982-01-13(a)(5)(B)

Thus, it is clear that though a debt be designated alimony, the exception to discharge will not operate unless the liability is actually in the nature of alimony.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a divorce-related debt from discharge only if the obligation is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support; the agreement’s label does not control.

Watrous v. George (In Re George) · filed 1981-11-13(a)(5)

That she chose not only to label the debt assumption as alimony but also as “nondischargeable” in bankruptcy does not change this Court’s duty under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5) to look behind the words of the agreement and determine whether the debt is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support for Debtor’s spouse.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a debtor’s assumption of joint marital debts from discharge when the assumption is in the nature of alimony or support.

Petoske v. Petoske (In Re Petoske) · filed 1982-01-12(a)(5)

Accordingly, the Court finds that the plaintiff has carried her burden of proof and has established that the debt assumption provision in question was intended to be and actually is in lieu of alimony or support. The fact that the provision may not comport with traditional state law definitions for such payments is of insufficient moment to avoid this conclusion. Consequently, plaintiff is entitled to a judgment declaring the debts excepted from discharge.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts an obligation to pay a former spouse’s secured debt from discharge when the payment constitutes support or maintenance.

Stamper v. Stamper (In Re Stamper) · filed 1982-01-18(a)(5)

It is further found, however, that the agreement to pay the security interest on the 1970 Rambler automobile (but not the stereo) on the facts constitutes support and maintenance to the defendant and is an exception to the discharge, pursuant to Section 523(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(5) applies only to debts, so a divorce decree’s life insurance requirement cannot be declared nondischargeable when it creates no right to payment.

Willet v. Willet (In re Willet) · filed 1981-12-14(a)(5)

Therefore, the type of debts which are defined under the Bankruptcy Code are limited to those which involve at some point a “right to payment”. A provision arising from a divorce decree which orders the debtor to maintain the children of his former marriage as beneficiaries on his life insurance policy involves no such “right”. It is not the type of obligation contemplated under 11 U.S.C. § 523 since a determination of non-dischargeability cannot be made by the Court as no debt exists to be considered.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts child support obligations for medical and dental expenses from discharge even when payment is owed to doctors and hospitals rather than directly to the spouse or children.

Growney v. Growney (In Re Growney) · filed 1981-12-15(a)(5)

The fact that at this time the debts are not payable directly to the wife or children, but instead ^are outstanding liabilities of both parents and payable to the doctors and hospitals involved, does not render them dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts spousal maintenance and a child’s medical debts from discharge when they are in the nature of support.

Bradley v. Harper (In Re Bradley) · filed 1981-12-17(a)(5)

Based upon the foregoing it is the determination of the Court that the $300.00 per month payment (as reduced by the state court at the hearing of June 10, 1981) is nondischargeable. ... This Court, having previously found the obligations to be in the nature of child support, now further finds these debts to be nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts debts assumed in a divorce agreement from discharge when the parties intended the payments to support the debtor’s former spouse or children.

Gentile v. Gentile (In Re Gentile) · filed 1982-01-07(a)(5)

Relief by way of payment of debts, an obligation which defendant assumed in the dissolution agreement, must have been intended as a further contribution towards the sustenance of his now separated family. It is obligations of this sort which are comprehended within the word “alimony”.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce obligations from discharge when they are actually in the nature of maintenance or support, including obligations paid to third parties.

Harrod v. Harrod (In Re Harrod) · filed 1982-01-15(a)(5)

Considering the policy behind the dischargeability sections of the Bankruptcy Code while examining all the facts and circumstances of the parties involved such as relative income, age, health, etc., the Court is constrained in this matter to find that the award of court costs and the duty of making automobile payments imposed upon the debtor are actually in the nature of maintenance or support for the former spouse, and thus are nondischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a divorce obligation from discharge when it divides community property rather than provides support.

Roberts v. Stachowiak (In Re Stachowiak) · filed 1982-01-11(a)(5)

Nevertheless, the decree of divorce arising out of the oral agreement did not provide support in the nature of alimony or maintenance. The amount to be paid under the decree was an amount geared to, and strictly measured by, a one-half interest in the community property appraised value of a house, less specific amounts for repairs, medical bills, balance of first mortgage and the allowance or denial of $3,419 conditioned upon sale of the house on or before a certain date without payment of a broker’s fee.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a debtor’s commitment to hold a former spouse harmless on a joint debt from discharge when discharging it would defeat the divorce decree’s support provisions.

McNamee v. McNamee (In re McNamee) · filed 1982-01-21(a)(5)

To conclude that the debtor’s pre-bankruptcy commitment to hold her harmless from this joint obligation is now dischargeable would obviously defeat the clear purpose of § 523(a)(5).

Under the pre-1981 version of § 523(a)(5)(A), assigned child support accruing after the bankruptcy petition is dischargeable.

STATE OF MINN. EX REL. DAGGETT v. Barr · filed 1982-02-17(a)(5)(A)

As an alternative to its constitutional attack, plaintiff alleges that even if section 523(a)(5)(A) is constitutional it should not be construed as discharging assigned support which accrues subsequent to the filing of the bankruptcy petition. ... This allegation is inconsistent with the overriding rule that exceptions to discharge are narrowly construed. ... We find no merit in plaintiff’s construction argument.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) makes a debt nondischargeable when it is actually in the nature of child support, even if the obligation takes the form of a note.

Davis v. Summer (In Re Summer) · filed 1982-04-08(a)(5)(B)

For the reasons herein stated, the payments required to be paid by the debtor to the plaintiff by the divorce decree dated December 16, 1975, and, specifically those payments on the $5,000 note executed in connection therewith, are determined to be in the nature of child support, and are, therefore, nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(B).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts payments that are actually for a former spouse’s support from discharge, even when the agreement calls them a property settlement.

Singer v. Singer (In Re Singer) · filed 1982-02-12(a)(5)

This Court finds that the periodic payments due under the terms of the separation agreement are in the nature of alimony and thus nondischargeable under the provisions of § 523(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a debt assumed in a separation agreement from discharge when the parties intended a division of property rather than alimony, maintenance, or support.

Malone v. Hackworth (In Re Hackworth) · filed 1982-04-01(a)(5)

We hold that defendant’s obligation does not constitute “alimony to, maintenance for, or support of” plaintiff and is therefore dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce-related debts from discharge when they are actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support, even if payment is owed to a third party.

Allen v. Eisenberg (In Re Eisenberg) · filed 1982-04-01(a)(5)

Based on the foregoing facts, the Court finds that the debt owed by debtor-defendant to plaintiff is a liability in the nature of alimony or maintenance and nondischargeable under § 523(a).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a mortgage payment obligation from discharge when it provides support and housing for a former spouse and child.

Hund v. Miller (In Re Miller) · filed 1982-02-22(a)(5)

Therefore, it is the conclusion of this Court that, as the debt owed to Plaintiff is for support and maintenance of Plaintiff and the minor child, the debt is nondis-chargeable in bankruptcy pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a second mortgage obligation from discharge when it is part of a property settlement rather than alimony, maintenance, or support.

Beckwith v. Wamsley (In Re Beckwith) · filed 1982-02-24(a)(5)

Plaintiff’s assumption of the $6,000.00 second mortgage to American Finance Company on the marital residence and agreeing to hold defendant harmless from payments thereon is not “alimony to, maintenance for, or support of both spouse or child”, but is rather part of the property settlement between the parties. ... Plaintiff’s debt is not excepted from discharge as provided in Section 523(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a divorce debt from discharge when it is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support, rather than a property settlement.

Hopkins v. Hopkins (In Re Hopkins) · filed 1982-03-12(a)(5)

Robert Hopkins’ assumption of the debts in question constitutes a property settlement and not an agreement in the nature of alimony. Accordingly, the debts in question are discharged, as they do not fall within the § 523(a)(5) exception.

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a divorce agreement’s hold harmless debt from discharge when the parties intended it as a property settlement rather than child support.

Stevens v. French (In Re French) · filed 1982-03-23(a)(5)

The clarity and specificity of these terms when compared with plaintiff’s rather tortured argument as to the purpose of the hold harmless provision, coupled with the inference which may be drawn from the placement of the hold harmless provision in the agreement, lead this Court to believe that at the time the parties entered into the stipulation agreement they did not consider the hold harmless provision to be in the nature of child support for the minor child.

Section 523(a)(5) makes attorneys’ fees and costs payable to a former spouse nondischargeable when they are in the nature of alimony, child support, or maintenance.

Lekvold v. Henderson (In Re Lekvold) · filed 1982-03-30(a)(5)

Each state court decision focused directly on the needs of the former spouse and children vis-a-vis plaintiff’s ability to provide for those needs, the award of attorneys’ fees and costs was in the nature of an award for alimony, child support or maintenance. Such amount is therefore nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce obligations from discharge when they are actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support, as determined under federal law.

In Re Marriage of Lytle · filed 1982-05-05(a)(5)

Petitioner also contends that respondent’s obligations should be nondischargeable because they constitute a debt “in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support/’ which is exempted from discharge under section 523(a) (5) of the Bankruptcy Code (11 U.S.C. sec. 523(a) (5) (Supp. III 1979)). We conclude, however, that the debt in question is discharge-able and that the proceedings should have been stayed.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a divorce settlement mortgage obligation from discharge when the payments are actually in the nature of support.

Voss v. Voss (In Re Voss) · filed 1982-06-04(a)(5)

This Court finds that Mr. Voss’s $178.00 per month obligation is nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) prevents discharge of a divorce-decree obligation intended as support rather than a division of property.

In the Matter of Rodney Coil, Bankrupt. Appeal of Rodney Coil · filed 1982-06-16(a)(5)

An indebtedness for a former spouse for alimony, maintenance, or support of the spouse or the couple’s children which is memorialized in the divorce decree is not dis-chargeable in bankruptcy. ... The bankruptcy court’s finding that the Coils’ settlement agreement was intended to obligate Rodney Coil to provide support and maintenance for Betty Coil and their son is not clearly erroneous.

Section 523(a)(5) makes arrearages nondischargeable when the underlying divorce obligation was intended to support a former spouse and child.

Anderson v. Anderson (In Re Anderson) · filed 1982-06-30(a)(5)

The evidence clearly indicates that both Mamie and Joseph believed that Mamie would use the proceeds from the award to support herself and her child. ... Accordingly, the Court finds that the State Court judgment of arrearages is nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce-related attorney-fee awards from discharge when they are in the nature of support, including fees for enforcing a support obligation.

Stanzione & Stanzione, P.A. v. Shenewolf (In Re Shenewolf) · filed 1982-05-20(a)(5)

Consequently, we view the first award of fees, granted in the divorce decree, in the nature of alimony, maintenance and support and thus, non-dis-chargeable. The second award of fees, granted for the enforcement of the divorce decree, is likewise non-dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) excepts a debt from discharge only if it is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support, regardless of how the parties label it.

Chapman v. Bales (In Re Chapman) · filed 1982-05-24(a)(5)(B)

The debt Chapman owes Bales on account of the loan he obtained from Freedlander, Incorporated, which note Bales later purchased, is neither in the nature of alimony nor child support pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(B).

Section 523(a)(5) makes obligations that are actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support nondischargeable.

Lesher v. Lesher (In Re Lesher) · filed 1982-06-02(a)(5)

Based on the foregoing, the Court holds that the $700.00 monthly obligation to Mrs. Lesher pursuant to the 1968 Illinois divorce decree, as well as all arrearages, are clearly in the nature of alimony, maintenance, and support; and are therefore nondischargeable pursuant to § 523(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(5) bars discharge of debts actually for alimony, maintenance, or support; a court cannot discharge them by balancing the parties’ needs.

Benz v. Nelson (In Re Nelson) · filed 1982-06-04(a)(5)

By creating an exception to the general rule of discharge, Congress, implicitly, resolved the balancing of the very interests considered by the court below in favor of the spouse. Congress did not, in any manner, manifest an intention that the bankruptcy courts should embark upon their own balancing of these policies.

Section 523(a)(5) requires a divorce obligation to be assessed by whether it actually provides alimony, maintenance, or support, rather than by the decree’s label.

Bailey v. Bailey (In Re Bailey) · filed 1982-06-14(a)(5)

In the present case, the award of $23,100 cannot be considered alimony, maintenance or support. The form of the award is more consistent with a property division than support.

Section 523(a)(5) makes mortgage obligations under a divorce decree nondischargeable when they provide support to a former spouse.

Newkirk v. Thomas (In Re Thomas) · filed 1982-07-06(a)(5)

As a result, this Court finds that the debtor’s obligations to the second and third mortgages as well as the arrearages on the first mortgage prior to April 1, 1981, on the property at 8 Argonne Court, Teaneck, New Jersey, are nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

A divorce counsel-fee debt that functions as support remains nondischargeable when the former spouse assigns it to her attorneys for collection.

In Re Auer · filed 1982-07-30(a)(5)(A)

In order to effectuate collection, in Spong, the award was drafted to run directly to the attorney; here it ran directly to the former spouse and was then assigned for $10.00. The goal, however, was the same, to wit, to enable the attorney to collect his fee from the debtor rather than from the former spouse who could not afford to pay it. Accordingly, it would be to exalt form over substance to fail to declare this debt nondis-chargeable.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) makes a divorce obligation nondischargeable if it is actually for support or maintenance, regardless of its label.

McLure v. McLure · filed 1982-09-13(a)(5)(B)

The issue in this case is not the name given the periodic payments, but whether the payments are an award for support and maintenance.

Section 523(a)(5) makes divorce obligations nondischargeable when they are in the nature of support; a decree's property-division label is relevant but not conclusive.

Wiley v. Wiley (In Re Wiley) · filed 1982-09-29(a)(5)

In this case due to the short duration of the marriage, the fact that there were no children of the marriage, the fact that the earnings of the plaintiff exceeded the earnings of the defendant, the fact that the decree makes no specific provision for support as such, and the fact that the provisions claimed by the plaintiff to be provisions in the nature of support were labeled by the divorce court as provisions for divisions of property, this court concludes that none of the provisions of the decree are in the nature of support. Therefore any liability owing by the defendant to the plaintiff under the decree of divorce are dis-chargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts support obligations from discharge; an obligation arising from a property settlement is dischargeable.

In Re Marriage of Clements · filed 1982-07-09(a)(5)

It is evident that the debts assigned to Marlene and the agreement to hold William harmless on these obligations were in settlement of property rights and were effectively discharged by her bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) does not prevent discharge of divorce debts arising from property division rather than alimony, maintenance, or support.

Zande v. Vande Zande (In Re Vande Zande) · filed 1982-08-04(a)(5)

Some general principles have emerged from the case law construing 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5). ... In the present case, the form of the award is more consistent with a property settlement than with alimony. ... Upon the foregoing I must conclude that the debt to Betty and the other debts arising out of the property division in the divorce are dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) makes a divorce-related debt nondischargeable when its underlying purpose is support, regardless of how the agreement labels it.

In Re Burns · filed 1982-07-26(a)(5)

It is clear from the above quoted section that the form of the document giving rise to the debt is irrelevant. The mere fact that the debtor’s obligation to make mortgage payments was based on a “Property Settlement Agreement” subsequently incorporated into a divorce decree does not, in and of itself, render the debt dischargea-ble in bankruptcy as being in the nature of property settlement as opposed to support. Rather, it is the underlying purpose of the debt itself that is the key factor in determining dischargeability.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) excepts attorney fees and a promise to indemnify a former spouse from discharge when they are actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support.

Harke v. Harke (In Re Harke) · filed 1982-09-22(a)(5)(B)

I hold that the order in the Decree of Dissolution for the payment of attorney fees and the Debtor’s promise to indemnify and hold harmless found in the separation agreement, incorporated into the Decree, are actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, and support, and therefore not discharged by this Debtor’s discharge in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) excepts a debt from discharge only if it is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support.

Stout v. Prussel · filed 1982-08-30(a)(5)(B)

However, under section 523(a)(5)(B), such debts are non-dischargea-ble in bankruptcy only if they are “actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support.” ... The bankruptcy judge looked solely at the property settlement agreement as a whole and determined that Prussel’s obligation to hold Stout harmless from any liability resulting from the SBA loan and lien was in the nature of a property settlement and therefore dischargeable in bankruptcy. Viewing the agreement as a whole, we cannot say that such a conclusion constitutes a gross abuse of discretion.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a former spouse’s obligation to pay household expenses from discharge as support only when the expenses are necessary and reasonable.

Hixson v. Hixson (In Re Hixson) · filed 1982-10-08(a)(5)

Even where an ex-spouse’s promise to pay household expenses is construed generally as an obligation in the nature of support and maintenance, the Court will impose a requirement of necessary and reasonable.

Section 523(a)(5) cannot except an obligation from discharge unless a debt exists.

Frisby v. Hileman (In Re Hileman) · filed 1982-11-03(a)(5)

Because § 523 speaks of dischargeability of “debt”, a debt must exist before the section can be invoked. The evidence showed in this case that there, was no debt owing to plaintiff from defendant and the issues must therefore be found in favor of defendant.

Section 523(a)(5) requires bankruptcy law, rather than state law, to determine whether a divorce obligation is for alimony, maintenance, or support.

Inskeep v. Draper (In Re Draper) · filed 1982-12-08(a)(5)

As pointed out in the prior decisions of this Court cited by the parties, the legislative history of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) in overruling cases such as In re Waller, 494 F.2d 447 (6th Cir.1974), clearly demonstrates that what constitutes alimony, maintenance, or support must be determined under bankruptcy law, not state law.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts child support obligations in a divorce judgment from discharge, including payments on the child's home, while a hold harmless obligation on a business debt is dischargeable.

Berman v. Berman (In Re Berman) · filed 1982-12-09(a)(5)

The debt in question here, owed to Nutmeg, was a business debt and is not within the exception. The hold harmless provision is, therefore, dischargeable. The obligation “to pay the mortgages on the home”, however, is for the support of the child. That obligation, which continues until 1987 (when the child will be 18), is non-dis-chargeable as is the debtor’s obligation to pay the wife $350 a month until the child reaches 18 if the wife vacates the house for any reason, including eviction through a foreclosure of the mortgage in question.

Section 523(a)(5) can except a divorce decree’s hold harmless obligation from discharge if the obligation provides alimony, maintenance or support.

Gonzalez v. Gonzalez (In Re Gonzalez) · filed 1983-01-27(a)(5)

Although there is authority in support of defendant’s position, this court believes the better view to be that a “hold harmless” agreement can create a nondis-chargeable obligation if it is found to be a means of providing alimony, maintenance or support, as those terms have been defined pursuant to Section 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts support and maintenance obligations from discharge, but does not cover debts arising from a division of marital property, regardless of the state court's labels.

Boyd v. Robinson (In Re Boyd) · filed 1982-12-21(a)(5)

Debts for support and maintenance of a spouse or dependent children have been excepted from discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5). But Congress and the Bankruptcy Court have been careful to limit this exception to obligations for support and maintenance and not to mere division of property regardless of the labels employed by the state court.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) excepts a debt to a former spouse from discharge when the obligation actually serves as support, including proceeds needed to provide a home for the children.

Kiggins v. Kiggins (In Re Kiggins) · filed 1983-01-12(a)(5)(B)

Although this ease is not as clear, this Court believes that the characterization of support must be extended to these proceeds. The proceeds were necessary in assisting Diane Kiggins in providing a new home for the children.

Section 523(a)(5) makes a debt to a former spouse nondischargeable when an agreement to pay a joint loan serves as a substitute for alimony, maintenance, or support.

Parisi v. White (In Re White) · filed 1983-01-24(a)(5)

Accordingly, the debt to the Plaintiff of $7,226.41 is nondischargeable as alimony, maintenance, or support pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a divorce obligation from discharge when the payment is in the nature of alimony, including a payment based on a spouse’s share of a savings plan.

Hill v. Hill (In Re Hill) · filed 1983-01-13(a)(5)

In the light of all the foregoing we hold in favor of plaintiff and conclude that the nine thousand dollar payment based upon the General Electric savings plan is in the nature of alimony and therefore non-dis-chargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a statutory attorney-fee award from discharge when the award is in the nature of spousal or child support.

McMurray v. Paulson (In Re Paulson) · filed 1983-01-26(a)(5)

Although not totally free from doubt, the court concludes and finds in the instant proceeding that the plaintiffs award of statutory attorneys’ fees by the state court is an ancillary obligation and said fees and expenses were awarded as being in the nature of spousal or child support under Tennessee Code Annotated § 36-822. Thus, the plaintiff’s obligation is non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) makes attorney’s fees nondischargeable when the obligation is associated with support and maintenance of a spouse and children.

Haast v. Frumkes (In Re Haast) · filed 1983-01-31(a)(5)

The Court finds that the debt in the instant case, being associated with support and maintenance of spouse and children, is nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5)(A) makes a child support debt dischargeable when a true assignment transfers a beneficial interest to another entity; a later reassignment does not restore the discharge exception.

Reichurdt v. Cerbello (In Re Reichurdt) · filed 1983-02-15(a)(5)(A)

Once the debt is assigned, the privileged party’s status is altered, the purpose for the exception falls, and any right to an exception to discharge under § 523(a)(5)A) is effectively waived.

Section 523(a)(5) makes debts to general creditors and counsel fees nondischargeable when they are actually in the nature of alimony or support.

Knight v. Knight (In Re Knight) · filed 1983-03-25(a)(5)

In conclusion, the Court finds as a matter of law that the debts jointly owed to the general creditors and the debt owed to the Plaintiffs attorney, arising from the consent decree of the state district court separation proceedings are in the nature of alimony and support and are therefore nondis-chargeable debts under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) makes an obligation that is alimony nondischargeable, even if the divorce decree labels it a division of property.

Shaver v. Shaver (In Re Shaver) · filed 1983-02-08(a)(5)

The $197,300 judgment represents alimony and is nondischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a divorce-related car debt from discharge when the debt divides marital property rather than providing alimony, maintenance, or support.

Jones v. Jones (In Re Jones) · filed 1983-02-22(a)(5)

The court considering the weight of these opinions reluctantly concludes in the instant proceeding that the 1976 Ford automobile judgment is in the nature of a division of property by the debtor and his former spouse, Margaret Jones, and not support, alimony, or maintenance for the ex-wife. This court agrees with the Indiana court in Frey, supra, the default by this debtor toward his ex-wife is regrettable, but it is not, under these circumstances, a debt that is nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) does not except repayment of a former spouse’s contribution to the marital home from discharge when the debt is a property obligation rather than alimony, maintenance, or support.

Hoskins v. Bilby (In Re Bilby) · filed 1983-02-08(a)(5)

For the following reasons we hold that defendant’s obligation does not constitute “alimony to, maintenance for, or support of” plaintiff, and is therefore dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts child support arrearages from discharge without requiring proof of a spouse’s or child’s present financial need.

Sheffield v. Sheffield (In Re Sheffield) · filed 1983-02-17(a)(5)

Such a conclusion is contrary to the Bankruptcy Code. The court is unaware of any situation in which the dischargeability of a debt has been determined by considering the financial needs of the parties disputing the dischargeability of the debt. The passage of time should not render a nondischargeable debt dischargeable. Otherwise it would be possible for parents to ultimately escape their support obligations.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a divorce debt from discharge when the award was intended as support, even if it arose from a division of property.

Carcifero v. Carcifero (In re Carcifero) · filed 1983-02-24(a)(5)

The significance of the quoted observations for present purposes is to make it clear that it is not dispositive that a debt arose by way of a setting off of property to a spouse in a divorce decree. It is to other factors that we must look in order to ascertain whether the debt is for alimony, maintenance, or support. ... These facts persuade us that the $5,300.00 amount set off to her in the divorce decree was intended to provide her a substitute for marital support. ... In the light of all of the foregoing, we find the issues in favor of plaintiff and hold the debt of $5,300.00 plus 10% interest per annum as provided in the divorce decree, commencing one year after the date thereof, to be a non-dischargeable debt, and that plaintiff may have judgment in that amount.

Section 523(a)(5) requires proof that an attorney’s fee award is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support for the debt to be excepted from discharge.

Nash v. Czepiga (In Re Czepiga) · filed 1983-03-08(a)(5)(B)

In view of the foregoing, I find that the plaintiff has not sustained her burden of proving that the award of an attorney’s fee was actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support.

Section 523(a)(5) does not permit a court to balance the debtor's financial hardship against the former spouse's when deciding whether alimony or child support is dischargeable.

Comer v. Comer (In Re Comer) · filed 1983-03-15(a)(5)

We decline to follow Warner. We agree with the district court's analysis in In re Nelson, 20 B.R. 1008, 1010 (D.C.M.D.Tenn. 1982), rev'd, 16 B.R. 658 (Bkrtcy.M.D. Tenn.). In reversing the bankruptcy court, which had adopted the Warner reasoning, the district court held that the absence of an express hardship exception in Code § 523(a)(5) when compared to the existence of such a provision in § 523(a)(8), relating to student loans, evidences legislative intention that dischargeability of § 523(a)(5) debts not be subject to a balancing of hardships by the bankruptcy court.

Section 523(a)(5) requires courts to examine whether a debt assigned in a separation agreement actually supports the debtor’s former family.

Smotherman v. Smotherman (In Re Smotherman) · filed 1983-03-18(a)(5)

The intent of this section requires the Court to examine the nature of the debt sought to be discharged and to determine whether or not the obligation placed on the Debtor by the Separation Agreement is for the upkeep of his former family.

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a marital property settlement from discharge when the obligation is not alimony, maintenance, or support.

Polen v. Polen (In Re Polen) · filed 1983-03-21(a)(5)

The $11,500 which the Circuit Court ordered the defendant to pay to the plaintiff is not in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support, alimony having been specifically dealt with by the court. The Monetary Award and Order, Amended Monetary Award and Order, and Order of Wage Lien were to terminate upon the payment to the plaintiff of the sum of $11,500. The debt of the defendant to the plaintiff is in the nature of a property settlement which is dischargeable in this Chapter 7 proceeding.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) distinguishes dischargeable property obligations from debts that are actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support.

Benavidez v. Benavidez · filed 1983-03-22(a)(5)(B)

According to section 523, therefore, those portions of property settlements in marriage dissolution proceedings not viewed as being in the nature of alimony are dis-chargeable. The task of determining which obligations are in the nature of alimony and which result from a disposition of property is often a difficult one. Bankruptcy law, rather than state law, applies in deciding what is alimony, maintenance, or support for the purpose of determining the nondischargeability of the debts involved.

Section 523(a)(5) makes obligations intended as support nondischargeable, including payments of a former spouse’s debts or attorney’s fees and payments labeled a property settlement.

In Re Edward Elijah Williams, Debtor. Joyce Colleen Williams v. Williams · filed 1983-04-01(a)(5)

In short, undertakings by one spouse to pay the other’s debts, including a debt to a lawyer for fees, can be “support” for bankruptcy purposes. So can periodic payments required to be made to a former spouse, even if the decree labels these payments a “property settlement.”

Section 523(a)(5) makes a former spouse’s hold harmless obligation nondischargeable only if the parties intended it as alimony, maintenance, or support rather than a division of debts.

Hobbs v. Hobbs (In Re Hobbs) · filed 1983-04-15(a)(5)

In short, plaintiff has not met her burden of showing that it was the intent of the parties at the time of divorce to consider the subject hold harmless agreement anything other than what the Agreement says it is: part of the division of community debts. In the absence of such proof, the Court must hold the debt dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5)(A) excepts from discharge support payments owed to a state under a continuing AFDC assignment, including payments that came due after the assignment was signed.

In Re Wilson · filed 1983-04-15(a)(5)(A)

Therefore, even under the debtors’ theory, upon filing a bankruptcy petition all payments owing to the Kansas SRS arising out of a continuing assignment pursuant to K.S.A. § 39-709(a)(2) are assignments of payments pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 602(a)(26) and excepted from discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(A).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts child support arrears from discharge even after they are reduced to a lump sum judgment and the children become emancipated.

Castle v. Parrish (In Re Parrish) · filed 1983-05-02(a)(5)

This Court has in numerous other eases held that a decree for support or alimony does not lose its nondischargeable character by merger into a subsequent lump sum judgment. ... Looking to the terms of the statute, this Court is constrained to hold that it is the duty to support a dependent child that is not dischargeable, and the amount payable under such a duty is a matter within the traditional jurisdiction of the state courts.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts child support established through a paternity suit from discharge.

Cain v. Isenhower (In Re Cain) · filed 1983-04-25(a)(5)

As a debt the substance of which is child support, established in a state court paternity suit, we find this debt to be nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) can except a mortgage-payment obligation from discharge when it functions as spousal support, but no amount is excepted if the support obligation ended before any payment is shown to have come due.

Lindsey v. Humphres (In Re Humphres) · filed 1983-04-28(a)(5)

Looking to the totality of the circumstances and acting pursuant to this court’s decision-making responsibility under the Diers case, supra, this court concludes that the debtor’s obligation constitutes alimony to, maintenance for, or support of plaintiff within the meaning of section 523(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code. ... Her remarriage terminated debtor’s obligation under applicable state law. ... Therefore, there is no evidence to justify a determination that any amount is nondischargeable in this adversary proceeding.

Section 523(a)(5)(A) does not treat a support-related attorney fee awarded directly to counsel as an assignment that makes the debt dischargeable.

Mainelli v. Whitman (In Re Whitman) · filed 1983-05-04(a)(5)(A)

The fact that the attorney fee was awarded directly to Mainelli and not to Candace Whitman does not render that debt dischargeable as being “assigned to another entity.”

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce attorney fee awards from discharge when they are in the nature of maintenance, alimony, or support.

Mancuso v. Kloss (In Re Kloss) · filed 1983-05-12(a)(5)

The issue presented in this case is whether an award of attorneys’ fees granted in a divorce proceeding is nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5). Under the facts of this case we find that the award of fees is in the nature of maintenance, alimony or support and thus is nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a child support obligation from discharge even when it arises from a family court order rather than a separation agreement, divorce decree, or property settlement agreement.

Krauskopf v. Mojica (In Re Mojica) · filed 1983-06-20(a)(5)

It is apparent that the debtor’s obligation did not arise from any of the above enumerated agreements. Rather, it was imposed on him by an order of the Family Court after his wife had applied for and been granted public assistance for the couple’s children. ... This Court holds that it may and is so excepted.

Section 523(a)(5) makes fees incurred to enforce spousal support nondischargeable when they are in the nature of support, even if payable directly to a court commissioner.

Cooley v. Sposa (In Re Sposa) · filed 1983-06-22(a)(5)

Applying the court’s reasoning in Smith to the facts of the instant case, this court holds that the commissioner’s fees are nondischargeable because the nature of the liability on which the award of costs is based was an action to enforce spousal support arrearages.

Section 523(a)(5) makes child support assigned under § 402(a)(26) of the Social Security Act nondischargeable when the bankruptcy petition is filed after the amendment took effect, even if the support accrued earlier.

Miller v. Merz (In Re Miller) · filed 1983-06-27(a)(5)

The statutory language is clear. Effective August 31, 1981, an assignment pursuant to § 402(a)(26) of the Social Security Act renders a child support obligation non-dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Under the pre-August 13, 1981 version of § 523(a)(5), child support assigned to another entity is dischargeable to the extent of the assignment.

McDonald v. McDonald (In Re McDonald) · filed 1983-06-27(a)(5)

Child support assigned to another entity, either voluntarily, by operation of law, or otherwise is dischargeable in bankruptcy proceedings to the extent of that assignment.

Section 523(a)(5) makes an obligation nondischargeable when it functions as support for minor children, even if the divorce agreement waives spousal support.

Lincoln v. Phillips (In Re Phillips) · filed 1983-06-30(a)(5)

Based upon the rationale of these opinions applied to the instant facts, it is the determination of this Court that the instant obligation is in the nature of a portion of the maintenance and support of minor children as contemplated in 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5), even though alimony and support for the divorced wife was explicitly waived in a division of property.

A court-ordered payment of a joint debt falls outside § 523(a)(5)’s exception to discharge when it is a property settlement rather than alimony, maintenance, or support.

Oakley v. Oakley · filed 1983-08-01(a)(5)

In view of the foregoing principles of bankruptcy law as applied to the facts in this case, the court is led to the conclusion that the defendant’s assumption of full responsibility for the joint debt of the parties to Szelenyi by the terms of the separation agreement and the following court order for its payment by the defendant was a property settlement of joint financial obligations, and not the payment of alimony to, maintenance for, or support of the plaintiff, who expressly disavowed any claim for alimony.

Section 523(a)(5) requires a debt between the former spouses before a divorce obligation can be treated as nondischargeable support.

Edwards v. Edwards (In Re Edwards) · filed 1983-07-05(a)(5)

Because 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) speaks of the discharge-ability of debt, a debt must exist between the parties before the section can be invoked.

Section 523(a)(5) makes accrued alimony arrearages nondischargeable when they are actually support, regardless of the former spouse’s present need.

Sharp v. Harrell (In Re Harrell) · filed 1983-07-05(a)(5)

The bankruptcy court’s conclusion that “a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether the debtor’s spouse or child are in present need of the above-mentioned arrearages” is immaterial, therefore, to an inquiry under section 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) requires the bankruptcy court to determine whether a divorce debt is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support rather than a property division.

Reed v. Reed (In Re Reed) · filed 1983-07-06(a)(5)

In the instant proceeding, the court must decide whether the subject debts were imposed as part of a property division or were actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support,” 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5). That was not the focus of issues before the state court.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce-related attorney’s fees from discharge when they are in the nature of alimony.

Walker v. Horton (In re Horton) · filed 1983-07-12(a)(5)(B)

However, the great majority of courts have held that the award of attorney’s fees is in the nature of alimony. ... We agree with the majority and hold that defendant’s obligation to plaintiff of $9,000 is a nondischargeable debt.

Section 523 excepts custody and support litigation fees and costs from discharge under (a)(5), and contempt fines that benefit a court rather than compensate a former spouse under (a)(7).

Rose v. Gedeon (In Re Gedeon) · filed 1983-08-03(a)(5), (a)(7)

This Court therefore finds that the attorney fees in the amount of $76,-377.00 plus costs are a nondischargeable debt under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5). ... This Court therefore finds the $10,000.00 awarded to the Plaintiff to compensate her for out-of-pocket expenses incurred as a result of the litigation over the custody and support of the children is a nondischargeable debt under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 523(a)(5). ... This Court therefore finds that the $42,-500.00 civil contempt penalty ordered by the New Mexico Court to be paid to the Plaintiff herein was a penalty imposed to uphold the dignity of the court and for the benefit of the court, thus nondischargeable under 523(a)(7). ... Thus this fine does not fall within the exception of 523(a)(7) and is therefore dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a debt from discharge only if it is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support; the agreement’s label does not control.

Croft v. Lynch (In re Lynch) · filed 1983-08-18(a)(5)

11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) excepts from discharge only such liabilities for alimony, maintenance or support which are actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance and support. The mere designation on paragraph 9 of maintenance does not make the obligation nondischargeable unless it is actually in the nature of maintenance.

Section 523(a)(5) can except support obligations from discharge even when payments are made to a third party rather than directly to a spouse or dependent.

In Re Clarence Oral Calhoun Fdba Bimbo's Place, Debtor. Jo Ann Long Fka Jo Ann Calhoun v. Clarence Oral Calhoun Fdba Bim · filed 1983-08-30(a)(5)

We agree with these courts and hold that payments in the nature of support need not be made directly to the spouse or dependent to be nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) excepts guaranteed provisional spousal support payments from discharge until the property settlement is completed.

Gerdes v. Gerdes (In Re Gerdes) · filed 1983-09-23(a)(5)(B)

The terms of the Separation Agreement which provided alimony payments funded from payments by corporations wholly owned by Plaintiff, Conrad Gerdes, as lessee, and guaranteed by personál liability assumed by Plaintiff, constitute provisional support and maintenance to Defendant, Delores V. Gerdes, which is not dis-chargeable as alimony under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(B), until the property settlement provisions have been consummated.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a debt to a former spouse from discharge when it is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support.

Shaver v. Shaver (In Re Shaver) · filed 1983-09-30(a)(5)

11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) specifies that an obligation to a spouse for alimony, maintenance or support is not dischargeable in bankruptcy provided the liability is “actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support.”