11 U.S.C. § 523

Section 523(a)(5) excepts support obligations from discharge, but a debt dividing marital property remains dischargeable.

Crouse v. Cleaver (In Re Cleaver) · filed 1983-10-26(a)(5)

Pursuant to a finding of intent of the state court and parties in establishing the debt obligation, and based upon this Court’s interpretation of federal law, plaintiff’s obligation is found to constitute a division of marital property, and thus properly dis-chargeable in bankruptcy notwithstanding application of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) requires a divorce-related debt to function as support to be excepted from discharge, even when the debt is payable to a third party.

Soderholm v. Soderholm (In re Soderholm) · filed 1983-09-16(a)(5)(B)

The fact that a debt is payable to a third party is not determinative of its classification. ... Accordingly, I conclude that the defendant’s debt to the bank is actually in the nature of child maintenance and support.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a debtor’s obligation to pay marital debts from discharge when the obligation provides alimony, maintenance, or support to a former spouse.

Graham v. Jenkins (In Re Jenkins) · filed 1983-09-19(a)(5)

Regardless of whether the Defendant “refused to pay alimony” and applying all the factors herein discussed in this decision we must find that the four debts in question must be considered as alimony to, maintenance for, or support of the Plaintiff. ... A Judgment shall be set forth in a separate document as required by Rule 921, Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, that the outstanding indebtedness owing by the husband to Beneficial Finance; Money, Inc.; and Mastercharge are debts which are non-dischargeable within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5), and that the matter of the enforcement of the provisions of the Divorce Decree is remanded to the Court which issued the Decree.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts an assumed marital debt from discharge when the debt is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support; a hold harmless clause alone does not establish that.

Holt v. Holt · filed 1983-10-17(a)(5)

In view of the foregoing, the trial court's apparent reliance upon the "hold harmless" provision in the divorce decree as the basis for its decision that the Mastercharge debt was nondischargeable, was improper. The provision should merely have been considered for its relevance to the fundamental inquiry into whether the debt was in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support.

Section 523(a)(5) makes an obligation in the nature of alimony, support, or maintenance nondischargeable; bankruptcy law determines that characterization.

Moses v. Moses · filed 1983-10-21(a)(5)

Consequently, such debt is nondis-chargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce obligations from discharge when they are in the nature of support, including mortgage payments and attorney’s fees.

Allshouse v. Allshouse (In Re Allshouse) · filed 1983-10-31(a)(5)

Based upon the foregoing, the Court concludes that Defendant’s obligations to make payments upon the second mortgage as ordered in the Judgment Entry of Divorce dated November 16, 1981; as well as the attorney’s fees awarded in the Order of August 11, 1982 are non-dischargeable on the basis of § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a debt from discharge when it is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support; the label given to an award does not control.

Wesley v. Wesley (In Re Wesley) · filed 1983-11-03(a)(5)

2. Plaintiff has failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that a debt owed to her by the defendant is “actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support” and is therefore nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts marital settlement obligations from discharge when they are actually child support or alimony.

Wellman v. Wellman (In re Wellman) · filed 1983-09-19(a)(5)

Upon such review this court concludes that the debtor’s obligations with respect to child support and alimony payments are clearly in the nature of “support” and “alimony” which Section 523(a)(5) serves to exempt from discharge.

Section 523(a)(5) makes past-due child support nondischargeable even when future support payments have been vacated.

Labelle v. Melton (In re Melton) · filed 1983-11-08(a)(5)

Thus, the Court finds the arrearage of payments is for child support, nondischargeable in bankruptcy under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) requires the bankruptcy court to examine the facts and circumstances to determine whether a divorce-related debt is actually alimony, maintenance, or support.

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

The Bankruptcy Court must examine the facts and circumstances of each case and make its own determination as to which obligations constitute alimony, maintenance and support.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts support obligations from discharge but permits discharge of property settlement obligations.

Wilburn v. Wilburn (In re Wilburn) · filed 1983-09-26(a)(5)

With such an intent it must be concluded that the terms of the divorce decree, on which the subsequent show cause judgment was founded, constitutes a property settlement between the parties. Consequently, the obligations imposed by that judgment, so far as they are listed in the Plaintiff’s Complaint, would be dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) permits discharge of divorce-related property divisions and debt allocations that are not in the nature of support.

Burk v. Haney (In Re Haney) · filed 1983-10-27(a)(5)(B)

Thus, support obligations are nondischargeable, whereas divisions of property, including allocations of debt, not in the nature of support are dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(B).

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

Bedingfield v. Bedingfield (In Re Bedingfield) · filed 1983-10-07(a)(5)

Debts payable to third parties can be viewed as maintenance or support obligations under this statute; the crucial issue is the function the award was intended to serve.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a divorce court’s counsel-fee award from discharge when the fee is in the nature of alimony or support.

Allen M. Kirshenbaum Law Offices v. Dutra (In Re Dutra) · filed 1983-10-19(a)(5)

Upon consideration of the record established before this Court, together with the Family Court decision, we conclude that Judge Goldberg’s order that Manuel Dutra pay a $3000 counsel fee to his former wife’s attorney is in the nature of alimony or support, and is therefore nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) makes an assumed mortgage debt nondischargeable when it supports a former spouse and child in the family home.

Cribb v. Cribb (In Re Cribb) · filed 1983-10-31(a)(5)(B)

The purpose of the debtor’s assumption of the second mortgage debt was to maintain and support the former spouse and child in the family home. ... Clearly, the debt assumption on the second mortgage meets both prongs of the test and is, therefore, not a dischargeable debt under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(B).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts alimony from discharge when the obligation is actually in the nature of support rather than a property settlement.

Ludwig v. Ludwig (In re Ludwig) · filed 1983-12-27(a)(5)(B)

No cases need to be examined to determine that this debt is alimony and not dischargeable. ... We conclude that the language of the agreement and the surrounding circumstances makes it clear that this debt is alimony and nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts attorney fees incurred defending a postdivorce custody motion from discharge when they are connected with the divorce decree, are in the nature of support, and are not assigned.

King v. Cowley (In Re Cowley) · filed 1983-11-22(a)(5)

The Court further finds that the attorney fees incurred resisting the motion for change of custody, are in connection with the divorce decree; are in the nature of alimony, support or maintenance; and are not assigned.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a debt payable to a third party from discharge when the debt is in the nature of alimony or support.

Brown v. Brown (In Re Brown) · filed 1983-11-23(a)(5)

This Court therefore finds that 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) was intended to except from discharge debts other than direct payments for alimony and support when said debts are in the nature of alimony or support.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts payments actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support from discharge.

Zimmerman v. Zimmerman · filed 1983-11-25(a)(5)

We find appellee to have adequately shown the weekly payments to be in the nature of alimony and maintenance and affirm the award of summary judgment in the amount of $7,290.00.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts child and spousal support debts arising from a separation agreement from discharge.

In Re Richard Arthur Comer, Debtor. Elaine F. Comer v. Comer · filed 1984-01-13(a)(5)

Richard conceded that the nature of the debt is one of child and spousal support, and the bankruptcy court determined that the debt arose in connection with a separation agreement. Such a debt clearly falls within an exception to discharge. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) makes a child-support debt nondischargeable even after it is reduced to a money judgment; the court may look behind the judgment to determine the debt’s nature.

Cope v. Cope (In Re Cope) · filed 1983-12-09(a)(5)

If the judgment is valid, this Court can still look behind the judgment on this issue of dischargeability. ... Therefore, for the above reasons, the debt of Edward to Judith is held to be nondis-chargeable.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) treats an agreement to pay children’s college expenses as nondischargeable support when the parties intended it to provide support.

Boyle v. Catherine C. Boyle Donovan, Ronald H. Boyle, II and Robert E. Boyle · filed 1984-01-09(a)(5)(B)

The college expense agreement, accordingly, could be considered as providing for the economic safety of the sons during their college years, and hence the agreement is “in the nature of support.” 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(B).

Section 523(a)(5) covers support obligations arising from paternity suits, including pregnancy and childbirth expenses that serve a support function.

In Re Balthazor · filed 1984-01-12(a)(5)

However, by construing this statutory provision in the light of its legislative history and applicable public policy, this Court is persuaded that support obligations arising out of paternity suits are within the scope of § 523(a)(5). ... The obligation due from the debtor father in the sum of $1,684.75 to the defendant, Winnebago County on behalf of the State of Wisconsin, for lying in expenses is in the nature of support. It is therefore nondischargeable under the provisions of § 523(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts support-related attorneys’ fees from discharge, including when a former spouse pays the fees and seeks reimbursement.

Griffin v. Griffin (In Re Griffin) · filed 1984-01-13(a)(5)

Since she paid an obligation for which he was obligated, she should be subrogated to the right of this payment. In this connection, there is ample authority characterizing attorneys’ fees as being in the nature of support and therefore nondischargeable.

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

Seidel v. Seidel (In Re Seidel) · filed 1984-01-31(a)(5)

The court has considered the above listed factors and based on all the evidence holds that the Property Settlement provisions in the Seidels’ Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage is not in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts assumed divorce debts from discharge when they are in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support; debts allocated as a division of property are dischargeable.

Plaugher v. Plaugher (In Re Plaugher) · filed 1984-02-10(a)(5)

The Court has considered all the relevant evidence in concluding, as trier of fact, that the obligations in question were not in the nature of alimony and support. ... The Court having no need to go further in this opinion, all the obligations in question are discharged.

Section 523(a)(5) treats reasonable guardian ad litem fees incurred in protecting a child’s interests in custody and related enforcement proceedings as support, subject to rebuttal by the debtor.

Matter of Coleman · filed 1984-01-31(a)(5)

Nonetheless, a presumption, open to rebuttal by the debtor, should exist that guardian ad litem fees incurred in performance of the guardian’s statutory duty of advocacy of the child’s best interests are nondischargeable as in the nature of support.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts counsel fees and expenses from discharge when the award serves as support by enabling a spouse to defend her interests in divorce proceedings.

Snyder v. Snyder (In Re Snyder) · filed 1984-02-28(a)(5)

Similarly, we find that the order granting judgment for counsel fees and expenses in favor of the plaintiff and against the debtor was for the purposes of support. The divorce court entered that order to enable the plaintiff to defend her interests in the divorce proceedings. We conclude that the award of counsel fees and expenses in the amount of $1,800 is in the nature of a support item ordered by the divorce court.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a debt to a former spouse from discharge only if the spouse proves it is in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support rather than a property distribution.

Rankin v. Alloway (In Re Alloway) · filed 1984-02-10(a)(5)

A debtor’s promise to hold the other spouse harmless in the repayment of any joint obligations would always tend to ameliorate the spouse’s financial condition, but unless the spouse bears her burden of proving that the debt is more akin to alimony, maintenance or support rather than a mere distribution of property, the debt will be discharged.

Section 523(a)(5) treats a divorce obligation as support based on its intended function, regardless of the divorce decree’s label.

Hillius v. Hillius (In Re Hillius Farms) · filed 1984-03-16(a)(5)

When determining whether a particular debt is actually a support obligation, the divorce decree’s designation of those obligations does not control the bankruptcy court’s determination. The crucial issue is the function the award was intended to serve.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) distinguishes support obligations from property settlements by the award’s true purpose; a property settlement is dischargeable.

Williams v. Williams (In Re Williams) · filed 1984-03-20(a)(5)(B)

The inference is strong that the disputed award of $127,000.00 was declared to remedy this inequity. The Court therefore holds that this award is in the nature of property settlement and is dischargeable.

Under § 523(a)(5)(A), state-assigned child support obligations were dischargeable for petitions filed before the August 13, 1981 amendment, even if the discharge hearing occurred afterward.

Franklin v. State of New Mexico, Ex Rel. Department of Human Services · filed 1984-03-26(a)(5)(A)

The United States District Court for the District of New Mexico reversed the Bankruptcy Court, finding that, case precedent and the legislative scheme of the Bankruptcy Code dictates application of the law in effect at the time of the filing. We agree.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce obligations from discharge only to the extent they are actually in the nature of alimony or support; installments that cease to serve as support upon the recipient’s remarriage are dischargeable.

Migliarese v. Migliarese (In Re Migliarese) · filed 1984-05-03(a)(5)

In spite of the fact that the total sum owed to Mrs. Caffero was for her support, the order directing these payments necessarily contemplated that they would not extend beyond the time when her need for support ended. By operation of law her need for support terminated upon her remarriage and any portion of the original $6,500 not yet due at that time automatically ceased to be for her support.

Section 523(a)(5) does not except divorce obligations from discharge when they were intended as a property division and do not provide necessary support.

Johnson v. Seta (In Re Seta) · filed 1984-05-09(a)(5)

For the reasons stated above, we find that the defendant’s obligation to hold plaintiff harmless as to the deficiency on the second mortgage, as well as his obligation to pay her $6,327.03, are both dis-chargeable under § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) can make an agreement to pay marital debts and hold a former spouse harmless nondischargeable when the obligation is in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support.

Bankr. L. Rep. P 69,777 in Re Douglas Wayne Troup, Debtor. Pamela M. Troup v. Troup · filed 1984-03-28(a)(5)

This court has recently held in Long v. Calhoun, 715 F.2d 1103 (6th Cir.1983), that § 523(a)(5) does not require alimony support or maintenance payments to be made directly to the spouse for them to be non-dischargeable. “Hold harmless” clauses such as the one employed in this case can create nondischargeable obligations. ... While we recognize that the bankruptcy court, not having our Calhoun case before it, did not make the complete analysis suggested therein, we nonetheless affirm the decision of both courts below since our review of the record does not allow us to find that the bankruptcy judge’s findings are clearly erroneous.

Section 523’s exception for alimony and support debts applies to the person who owes the debt, not to a later purchaser of property subject to a lien securing it.

In re Schnabel · filed 1984-05-09(a)(5)

However, the potentially non-dischargeable debt exists between Perales and her ex-husband. This non-dischargeable character cannot be asserted as defense to the extinguishing of this lien on the Debtor’s property because there was never any direct relationship between these parties which would give rise to the obligation to pay alimony or support. Accordingly, the non-dischargeability of the debt exists only as to Benjamin Perales and does not extend to subsequent purchasers of the property.

Section 523(a)(5) requires courts to determine whether a divorce obligation functions as support or as a property settlement, regardless of how the decree labels it.

Boyd-Leopard v. Douglass (In Re Boyd-Leopard) · filed 1984-05-14(a)(5)

Thus, the bankruptcy court may look beyond the four corners of a divorce decree or an agreement of the parties in order to determine the nature of the payments constituting the debts sought to be discharged. The characterization placed on the award by a state court in the decree is not determinative. The function or purpose which the award was intended to serve or support is the crucial issue.

Section 523(a)(5) makes an assumed joint debt nondischargeable when repayment is in the nature of child support, even if payment is owed to a third party.

Rich v. Rich (In Re Rich) · filed 1984-05-15(a)(5)

Accordingly, it is my conclusion that the debtor’s agreement to assume the joint debt to the First National Bank is a debt to a former spouse or child of the debtor within the meaning of Section 523(a)(5). ... Because repayment of the loan is in the nature of child support, it is nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) makes a spouse’s necessary matrimonial counsel fees nondischargeable when they function as indirect support, even if paid directly to the lawyer.

Essner v. Homyak (In Re Homyak) · filed 1984-05-16(a)(5)

Hence, the $900 fee awarded to the plaintiff is to be treated as in the nature of indirect alimony, maintenance or support, and therefore, is not dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts unpaid child support obligations from discharge.

In Re MacDonald · filed 1984-08-08(a)(5)

Therefore, that $4,776.55 is non-dischargeable pursuant to § 523(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) excludes a debt to a former spouse from discharge only if it is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support; a debt dividing community property is dischargeable.

In Re Marriage of Williams · filed 1984-06-29(a)(5)(B)

Because this debt clearly arose out of the division of the community property unrelated to alimony, support, or maintenance, it was dischargeable in bankruptcy (subject to the limitations to be discussed below).

Section 523(a)(5)(B) makes a debt to a former spouse nondischargeable when it is actually in the nature of support, regardless of how the divorce decree labels it.

Bankr. L. Rep. P 69,922 Nancy H. Shaver v. Shaver · filed 1984-07-03(a)(5)(B)

We agree with the district court that the intent of the parties in entering into the settlement agreement was to provide support to Nancy, and therefore that the obligation was “in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support” under federal law. A support obligation is not dischargeable under the Bankruptcy Code. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(B) (1982).

Section 523(a)(5) does not prevent discharge of a divorce debt that allocates marital property rather than provides alimony or support.

Hall v. Hall (In Re Hall) · filed 1984-07-11(a)(5)

Based on the factors set out above, we must find that the debt created by the Maryland judgment against the defendant in the amount of $93,000 is dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts genuine alimony and support obligations from discharge even when payment is made directly to a third party.

Williams v. Holt (In Re Holt) · filed 1984-07-13(a)(5)

The “debt” of the sort envisioned by the drafters of § 523(a)(5) may have an underlying obligation, such as a retail installment contract on furniture, an automobile purchase, or a second mortgage. Such would rarely be “payable” to the former spouse. Nevertheless, the obligation of one former spouse made in connection with a separation agreement or imposed by a divorce decree to the effect that such spouse would pay a debt of the other spouse, or of the couple, is not thereby rendered dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) makes a divorce obligation nondischargeable when it is actually for maintenance or support, regardless of the label used in the decree.

Kline v. Kline (In Re Kline) · filed 1984-07-31(a)(5)(B)

It is well settled that when deciding the dischargeability of obligations imposed by a divorce decree, the Bankruptcy Court must review such obligations with the purpose of determining which debts are actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, and support, and which are actually property settlements. The Bankruptcy Court does not have to accept as determinative those statements in a decree that designate obligations as alimony, maintenance, and support, or as property settlements.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) permits discharge of divorce obligations that divide property or allocate debts rather than provide support.

Pody v. Pody (In Re Pody) · filed 1984-09-17(a)(5)(B)

Thus support obligations are nondis-chargeable, whereas divisions of property, including allocations of debt, not in the nature of support are dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(B). ... Therefore, the Court concludes that the debt owed to the debtor’s former spouse is not in the nature of support and that the debt is dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) requires proof that a support debt benefits a child of the debtor before the debt is excepted from discharge.

Gray v. Engesser (In Re Gray) · filed 1984-08-17(a)(5)

Thus, defendants have failed to meet their burden of proving the paternity required by § 523(a)(5). ... Having so failed to establish the requirements for an exception to discharge, this Court cannot, in light of the statutory language, except from discharge a debt to support a child not proven to be fathered by the debtor.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts an obligation to pay a child’s college expenses from discharge when the agreement was intended as support, even if payment may not be owed after the child turns 21.

Proctor v. Proctor (In Re Proctor) · filed 1984-09-04(a)(5)

That Rick may have no obligation to pay for Jessica’s college education or, at least, may have no obligation to pay the same after Jessica becomes 21 does not alter the nature of this agreement as being one “actually in the nature of ... support” under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5), Boyle v. Donovan, 724- F.2d 681 (8th Cir.1984).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce obligations that are actually support from discharge, but allows discharge of property settlements.

Hansen v. Hansen (In Re Hansen) · filed 1984-09-26(a)(5)

It is well settled that when deciding the dischargeability of obligations imposed by a divorce decree, the Bankruptcy Court must review such obligations with the purpose of determining which debts are actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, and support, and which are actually property settlements. Those that are support for the former family will not be discharged, whereas those that are property settlements will be discharged.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts an obligation to a former spouse from discharge when it is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support rather than a property settlement.

Morgan v. Battaglia (In re Battaglia) · filed 1984-10-16(a)(5)

Debtor assumed certain of their joint obligations not to enable Ms. Morgan to support herself and her child but in return for conveyance of her interest in the marital home. This is not a obligation in the nature of alimony,. maintenance or support that can be excepted from discharge under § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) requires the party seeking to except a debt from discharge to prove that the debt is actually for alimony, maintenance, or support.

Barto v. Bowers (In Re Bowers) · filed 1984-10-11(a)(5)

For all of the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the plaintiff has clearly failed to meet her burden of proving that the debt in question is for alimony, maintenance, or support and thus nondischargeable within the meaning of § 523(a)(5).

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

Froman v. Froman (In Re Froman) · filed 1984-10-22(a)(5)(B)

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

Section 523(a)(5) can treat a divorce decree’s protection against new debt on a former spouse’s joint credit account as nondischargeable support.

Ramsey v. Hiller (In Re Hiller) · filed 1984-11-16(a)(5)

By not further encumbering the Plaintiff on a joint credit arrangement the Defendant does, in fact, contribute to the Plaintiff’s financial status by protecting her from future indebtedness. ... Accordingly, any breach of this clause of the divorce decree would be a nondischargeable debt.

Section 523(a)(5) makes attorney fees awarded as spousal support nondischargeable even when payable directly to the attorney and the former spouse later files for bankruptcy.

Snider v. Tessler (In Re Tessler) · filed 1984-11-28(a)(5)

The debtor’s obligation to the plaintiff, for services performed on behalf of his ex-wife in a domestic relations matter, are nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5). This is so even though the ex-wife files a petition under Chapter 7 subsequent to the debtor.

Section 523(a)(5) makes an assumed joint debt nondischargeable when paying it was necessary for the former spouse’s daily necessities both at divorce and when bankruptcy was filed.

Yeates v. Yeates (In Re Yeates) · filed 1984-11-28(a)(5)

First, the bankruptcy court should determine whether, at the time of divorce, the agreement to pay was necessary for the former spouse to maintain the “daily necessities,” such as food, housing, and transportation. ... Second, the court should determine whether, at the time bankruptcy was filed, the agreement to pay is still necessary for the former spouse to maintain the daily necessities. This determination should be made in light of the former spouse’s financial condition at the time of the bankruptcy filing. If the answer to either question is “no,” the debt must be discharged. If the answer to both questions is “yes,” the debt is exempt from discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a divorce-related debt from discharge when the debt was intended to divide property rather than provide alimony or support.

Brandstadt v. Brandstadt (In re Brandstadt) · filed 1984-12-06(a)(5)

Taking all of the various factors into consideration the court finds that the plaintiff never met her burden of proving the debt was intended as alimony or support and that the defendant demonstrated conclusively that the promissory note was based on a property settlement and was thus dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts past-due alimony and child support from discharge even when the spouse or children do not presently need the payments for support.

Schack v. Kappitt (In Re Schack) · filed 1985-01-09(a)(5)

It is the husband’s contention that a past due obligation for either alimony or child support, which is not presently needed by the spouse or children for their continuing support at the time of bankruptcy is dischargeable. ... I disagree. Section 523(a)(5) is completely unambiguous: ... There is no basis in the statute or its legislative history for the additional requirement imposed by Warner.

Section 523(a)(5) makes an obligation for children’s education nondischargeable when it is in the nature of child support, even if rejection of the underlying agreement creates a breach of contract claim.

In Re Draper · filed 1985-01-31(a)(5)

With great deference to the opinion of the chancellor, this Court construes the obligation due under paragraph 6 for the education of the children to be in the nature of child support which is subject to modification under applicable state law notwithstanding the contract of the parties. ... If the debtor-in-possession was permitted to reject the contract, then the former Mrs. Draper would have a nondis-chargeable claim for damages for breach of contract the amount of which is easily ascertainable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts child support liabilities arising from paternity orders from discharge.

Pierson v. Toman (In Re Pierson) · filed 1985-03-11(a)(5)

The more appropriate solution, particularly in view of the lack of any legislative history suggesting that Congress intentionally changed the law, is to read Section 523(a)(5) to include paternity child support liabilities and, thereby, avoid altogether the constitutional problem.

A former spouse seeking to except a debt from discharge under § 523(a)(5) must prove that it is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support.

Tsanos v. Bell (In Re Bell) · filed 1985-03-12(a)(5)

Based on the foregoing, the court determines that plaintiff has not met her burden of proving that the debt flowing from the judgment and the stipulation is in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support. The plaintiffs complaint therefore must be dismissed.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) excepts a divorce debt from discharge when the debt is actually for alimony, maintenance, or support, regardless of its label.

Feldman v. Grimes (In Re Grimes) · filed 1985-01-25(a)(5)(B)

The $1,698.27 debt is therefore nondischargeable under § 523(a)(5) and Debtor’s exemption remains liable for that amount.

Section 523(a)(5) does not prevent discharge of marital debts divided in a divorce decree when the division was not intended to provide support.

Farr v. Hack (In re Hack) · filed 1985-02-06(a)(5)

Under these circumstances it must be con-' eluded that such debts are dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a court-ordered child support obligation from discharge even when it does not arise from a separation agreement, divorce decree, or property settlement.

Jordan v. Jordan (In Re Jordan) · filed 1985-04-01(a)(5)

We now turn to the debts in question here. Based on the above criteria, we find the debtor’s $60 per week child support obligation nondischargeable under § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts an obligation from discharge when it is actually for support; calling a payment maintenance does not make it support.

Helm v. Helm (In Re Helm) · filed 1985-04-15(a)(5)

That section, it must be noted, draws no dischargeability distinctions between “reasonable” and “unreasonable” support; either an obligation is for support, and therefore nondischargeable, or it is not.

Section 523(a)(5) allows bankruptcy courts to review obligations labeled maintenance, and the Calhoun rule applies to support cases beyond debt-assumption cases.

Helm v. Helm (In re Helm) · filed 1985-06-03(a)(5)

That premise — taken as so self-evident that it was admittedly glossed over — was that the Calhoun rule is not limited to debt-assumption cases, but has “general applicability to all support cases brought under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)”. ... We stand on the premise.

Section 523(a)(5) makes a monthly payment nondischargeable when it was intended as support, provides necessary support, and is not manifestly unreasonable.

Catlett v. Jackson (In Re Jackson) · filed 1985-04-23(a)(5)

For the reasons briefly discussed below we hold the $300 monthly payment to be a nondischargeable award of maintenance and support under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) makes mortgage payments nondischargeable as support to the extent their nonpayment deprived a former spouse of occupancy of the home.

Sanders v. Sanders (In re Sanders) · filed 1985-04-24(a)(5)

Consistent with the foregoing, we hold that plaintiff is entitled to a determination of nondischargeability for so much of the mortgage payments which became due between June and September 1984, and plaintiff shall have judgment in the amount of $1101.44.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts from discharge a divorce-related payment intended to provide a home for a former spouse and children because it is in the nature of support.

Mencer v. Mencer (In Re Mencer) · filed 1985-05-06(a)(5)

The Court concludes that the obligation of Marley Mencer to pay to Mary Elizabeth Mencer the sum of $31,000.00 is in the nature of support and is determined to be nondischargeable pursuant to the provisions of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce obligations in the nature of support from discharge, while property settlement obligations are dischargeable.

Britton v. Britton (In Re Britton) · filed 1985-05-22(a)(5)

The decree provided that the debtor pay for the plaintiff’s medical expenses with no specific terminate date. This obligation is difficult to categorize since it remains in effect for an indefinite period of time. However, this Court finds that the uncertainty as to how long the obligation will exist coupled with the discrepancy in incomes indicates that the trial court intended this obligation to be in the nature of support. Accordingly, except for this one provision requiring payment of the plaintiff’s medical expenses, the obligations set forth in the divorce decree are in the nature of a property settlement agreement and are thus dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) makes a debt for a former spouse’s legal fees nondischargeable when the debt is in the nature of alimony or support, even if payable directly to the attorney.

Bolt v. Bolt (In re Bolt) · filed 1985-05-31(a)(5)

The state court order, though perhaps inartfully drafted, did identify the expenditure for legal representation of the former wife as the husband’s expense in the nature of alimony. Therefore, Mrs. Bolt’s claim is a nondischargeable claim against the debtor since this debt is in the nature of alimony or support, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5)(B) does not except an equitable distribution debt from discharge when it is a property settlement rather than alimony, maintenance, or support.

Glaser v. Glaser (In Re Glaser) · filed 1985-06-07(a)(5)(B)

Additionally, the $17,000 equitable distribution debt constitutes a property settlement and is not a liability in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(B), and is, therefore, dischargea-ble.

Section 523(a)(5) makes a divorce award nondischargeable if it is in the nature of support, even when the state court labels it a division of property.

Hall v. Hall (In Re Hall) · filed 1985-06-24(a)(5)

As an alternative basis for its decision, the bankruptcy court ruled that the pension award was in the nature of support and, as such, nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5). Federal law controls the characterization of a claim as one for alimony or support for purposes of determining dischargeability. ... This Court discerns no error in the bankruptcy court’s factual determination and shall affirm the bankruptcy- court on the alternative ground that the pension award created a nondischargeable support obligation.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) makes a divorce obligation nondischargeable only if it is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support; a property settlement paid in installments is dischargeable.

Mandel v. Goodman (In Re Goodman) · filed 1985-07-30(a)(5)(B)

For the foregoing reasons, this Court concludes that Goodman’s obligation to make the payments “in lieu of all alimony” to Mandel is not nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5)(B). However, the child support payments are nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce obligations intended as support from discharge; an obligation intended as property division is dischargeable.

Gebhardt v. Gebhardt (In Re Gebhardt) · filed 1985-08-07(a)(5)

The overwhelming evidence is that the $80,000 promissory note was in fact part of the property division and, therefore, is dischargeable. ... If the provision has as its intended function the providing of a necessity of life, it is ordinarily held to be non-dischargeable support or maintenance.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts guardian ad litem fees incurred for children’s benefit from discharge even when the fees are payable to the guardian and the state decree labels them litigation costs.

Hack v. Laney (In Re Laney) · filed 1985-08-09(a)(5)

Consequently, for purposes of determining the discharge-ability of the debt, this Court holds that the obligation is a support obligation, notwithstanding language to the contrary in the state court decree, and that the debt will be excepted from Debtors’ discharge.

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a divorce debt from discharge when the debt is a property division rather than alimony, maintenance, or support.

Coffman v. Coffman (In Re Coffman) · filed 1985-08-28(a)(5)

These components constituted a pure property division and in no manner did they represent alimony, maintenance, or support.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts mortgage payments required by a divorce agreement from discharge when they serve as support or maintenance.

Galpin v. Galpin (In Re Galpin) · filed 1985-09-18(a)(5)

A reading of the terms of the divorce agreement, providing for a doubling of the child support payments effective immediately after the sale of the house, clearly indicates that it was the intent of the parties that the house payments were in the nature of support or maintenance. The bankruptcy court’s finding that the defendant’s obligation to make house payments is non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) is not clearly erroneous.

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

Ivy v. McVay (In Re McVay) · filed 1985-10-02(a)(5)

As such, the Court finds that the provision relating to the cancellation of the indebtedness still encumbering the Plaintiffs residence is not in the nature of alimony, and therefore, is dischargeable in this bankruptcy proceeding.

Section 523(a)(5) makes a debtor’s obligation to pay a former spouse’s attorney fees nondischargeable when the payment is intended as support.

Heck v. Heck (In Re Heck) · filed 1985-10-03(a)(5)

Consideration of these factors indicates the intent of thé parties to provide support through the payment of the attorney fee of the former wife. The provision for the payment of $2,370 is a nondischargeable debt.

Section 523(a)(5) makes a debt assumed under a separation agreement nondischargeable when the obligation was intended to provide support.

Walter v. Walter (In Re Walter) · filed 1985-11-25(a)(5)

The debtor’s assumption of the second mortgage payment was essential to maintain the family home. Consequently, debtor’s agreement to assume the HFC obligation is in the nature of alimony, support or maintenance, non-dis-chargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5), and payable to plaintiff in accordance with the terms of his note.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) turns on whether a divorce obligation is actually support, regardless of the label in the divorce decree.

Cochrun v. Thomas (In Re Thomas) · filed 1985-10-28(a)(5)(B)

Of course the Court is not bound by “labels” in a divorce decree but substance prevails over form and the Court will effectuate the parties and the divorce court’s intent in determining whether this obligation is in the nature of support.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a divorce award from discharge when it provides reasonable support, but permits discharge of an award that is not maintenance or support.

Taylor v. Lineberry (In Re Lineberry) · filed 1985-11-19(a)(5)(B)

As such, the Court finds that the $24,353.65 award constitutes a judgment debt and is dischargeable inasmuch as it is not in the nature of maintenance and support. ... Accordingly, the Court finds that the award of support is not manifestly unreasonable under traditional concepts of support and is nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts only the support portion of a divorce obligation from discharge; an agreement to indemnify a former spouse for joint educational loans is dischargeable when it was not intended as support.

White v. White (In Re White) · filed 1985-12-12(a)(5)(B)

In summary, Dr. White’s obligation to hold Mr. White harmless on notes they cosigned for educational loans is discharge-able; her obligation to make payments to him from her future income is nondis-chargeable only to the extent of fifteen (15) percent of her taxable income, for a period not to exceed three years, while she is in military service.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts mortgage payments from discharge when they are intended to provide housing support for a former spouse and children.

Delaine v. Delaine (In Re Delaine) · filed 1985-12-20(a)(5)

The Court determines that paragraph SIXTH creates an obligation that is “in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support” which is excepted from discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5) (1984).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts interest on a child support judgment from discharge along with the underlying support debt.

Frederickson v. Coleman (In Re Coleman) · filed 1986-01-03(a)(5)

Section 523(a)(5) excepts from discharge any debt: ... The court has found no authority directly on point, however, the nature of the debt is determined when it is incurred. The children may have all left the home, but that does not change the nature of the debt. This court is of the opinion that the judgment interest is also nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts support obligations from discharge, but debts that are actually part of a property settlement are dischargeable even if the divorce agreement calls them alimony.

Ramey v. Ramey (In Re Ramey) · filed 1986-01-06(a)(5)

While obligations for alimony, support and child support are not dischargeable in bankruptcy, obligations which are in the nature of a property settlement are dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) does not preserve the nondischargeable status of a debt to a former spouse who dies before the debtor files for bankruptcy.

McCarthy v. Edwards (In Re Edwards) · filed 1986-01-09(a)(5)

In view of the limitation of the discharge-ability provisions to a debtor’s spouse, former spouse, or child, it follows from a reading of the statute that because the debtor filed this case after the death of his former spouse, the dischargeability claim did not survive.

Under the 1978 version of § 523(a)(5), a genuine spousal support obligation imposed by a court order is excepted from discharge even if the order is not a separation agreement, divorce decree, or property settlement agreement.

Shine v. Shine (In Re Shine) · filed 1986-01-17(a)(5)

The court acknowledges that the debt owed to plaintiff does not fall expressly within the sources enumerated in section 523(a)(5). It is clear, however, that the obligation owed to plaintiff was imposed by an order of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, Family Division, for the support and maintenance of his wife, the plaintiff in this action. ... This court concludes that the bankruptcy court erred in finding that the support obligation owed to plaintiff was dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) requires the creditor to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the obligation is alimony to except it from discharge.

Hudgens v. Hudgens (In Re Hudgens) · filed 1986-01-22(a)(5)

The objection to dischargeability is denied because Complainant has not shown, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the obligation constituted alimony.

Section 523(a)(5) requires a court to determine whether a divorce decree’s hold-harmless obligation actually provides maintenance or support.

Shimp v. Shimp (In Re Shimp) · filed 1986-02-13(a)(5)

However, “hold harmless” clauses do not, in and of themselves, constrain the Bankruptcy Court to find that such obligations are maintenance and support.

Section 523(a)(5) makes attorney’s fees and interest nondischargeable to the extent they relate to nondischargeable support debt.

Catlett v. Jackson (In Re Jackson) · filed 1986-02-20(a)(5)

Since two-thirds of the underlying $6,000 debt in this case was a nondischargeable maintenance arrearage, then two-thirds of the attorney’s fees and interest also must be nondis-chargeable, as our original order provides.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts support obligations from discharge, including a parent's obligation to pay for the children's return travel, but does not except debts assigned as part of a property division.

MacY v. MacY · filed 1986-02-25(a)(5)

This position has judicial sanction unless in some way the payment of debts required of defendant in the divorce decree can be construed to be alimony or child support which are nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5), supra note 2. ... Since we cannot conceive anything in the nature of alimony or child support with respect to the division of property and debts, we must conclude and hold that defendant's discharge in bankruptcy prohibits the trial judge from entering judgment for plaintiff against defendant for debts discharged in bankruptcy which plaintiff was and will be required to pay. ... However, the $508.46 air fare for return of the children which plaintiff was required to pay was properly chargeable to defendant as an item of support under the express support and visitation provisions of the divorce decree.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts alimony, child support, and maintenance from discharge, but does not except a property settlement.

Marriage of Stolp v. Stolp · filed 1986-03-18(a)(5)

Although payments for alimony, child support and maintenance are not dischargeable in a bankruptcy proceeding, a property settlement is dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts support obligations from discharge, but a mortgage obligation intended to equalize a divorce property settlement is dischargeable.

Tosti v. Tosti (In Re Tosti) · filed 1986-04-02(a)(5)

Troublesome though it may be, in the instant case it is clear that the court intended the payment of the mortgage to be an equalization of the property settlement aspect of the divorce. That being the case, under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) the debt created by the hold harmless obligation of the husband with respect to the mortgages on the property conveyed to the wife is dischargeable under the bankruptcy code.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts payments from discharge when they provide alimony or support, even if the agreement also settles property rights.

In Re Robert F. Singer, Debtor. Lethia A. Singer v. Singer · filed 1986-04-04(a)(5)

Thus, the bankruptcy court was not in error in characterizing the periodic payments pursuant to the Settlement Agreement as alimony, thereby being non-dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) makes an assumed car loan nondischargeable to the extent it provides necessary support and the amount is reasonable in light of the debtor’s financial circumstances.

Erler v. Erler (In Re Erler) · filed 1986-04-17(a)(5)(B)

In view of Ms. Erler’s income and expenses at the time, including custody and child care expenses, we find that the car loan assumption is “in the nature of” support for purposes of the Bankruptcy Act. ... Considering traditional state law factors (see KRS 403.200), as the relative earning powers of these parties and their financial status, including current income and obligations of both, we find that the amount of $2,000.00 can be fairly considered “in the nature of” support for purposes of federal bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) makes a child-support debt nondischargeable when the debtor is liable to the other parent, even if the debtor is also directly liable to the service provider.

Howe v. Scannell (In Re Scannell) · filed 1986-04-22(a)(5)

The fact that the defendant may be directly liable to Dr. Swetlik is irrelevant since the debt in question remains one for nondischargeable support.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) excepts an attorney-fee debt from discharge when the fees are in the nature of alimony or support rather than a property settlement.

Jackson v. Jackson (In re Jackson) · filed 1986-03-05(a)(5)(B)

I find, therefore, that the debt for legal expense is a debt in the nature of alimony or support and not a property settlement. It is not, therefore, dischargea-ble.

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

Brock v. Barlow (In Re Brock) · filed 1986-03-14(a)(5)

In such circumstances, it is impossible to conclude that the payment of this obligation had the effect of providing necessary support to Barlow.

Section 523(a)(5) makes a divorce decree’s attorney-fee obligation nondischargeable when it is in the nature of alimony or support.

Sigworth v. Sigworth (In Re Sigworth) · filed 1986-03-25(a)(5)

In that regard, it is generally held that an obligation to pay attorney fees which is imposed by a divorce decree is alimony for purposes of nondischarge-ability under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5). ... Therefore, in the absence of other factors which would warrant the characterization of the debt for attorney fees as a property settlement, it must be concluded that the obligation, as set forth in the divorce decree, is non-dis-chargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) requires proof that a divorce obligation is actually in the nature of support; the parties’ mutual intent matters more than the agreement’s labels.

William J. Tilley, Jr., 7-85-0031 a v. Jessee · filed 1986-05-05(a)(5)

We hold, therefore, that the obligation created by paragraph 5 of the post-nuptial agreement between appellant and appellee was not in the nature of alimony and, accordingly, should be dis-chargeable in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5)(A) excepts child support debts validly assigned to a state from discharge even when the debts did not arise under a listed agreement or court order.

Walden v. Florida, Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services (In Re Walden) · filed 1986-05-07(a)(5)(A)

This Court finds that a literal interpretation of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(A) nullifies the express goal of Congress in amending § 523 and readopting 42 U.S.C. § 656(b). ... Having determined that 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(A) and 42 U.S.C. § 656(b) should be interpreted identically, the Court turns to the issue of whether the subject $12,-118.00 is a debt assigned pursuant to § 402(a)(26) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 602(a)(26).

Section 523(a)(5) makes support obligations nondischargeable, and determining whether an obligation is support does not require a needs test.

William W. DRAPER, III, Appellant, v. Debra DRAPER, Appellee · filed 1986-05-07(a)(5)

In addition, we reject the relevancy of a “needs” test in determining whether obligations are “actually in the nature of ... support” and thus nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce payments from discharge when they are actually for a spouse’s support rather than a division of property.

Bell v. Bell (In Re Bell) · filed 1986-05-21(a)(5)

In reviewing whether the 121 monthly installments constituted alimony in the case at bar, a disposition on each of the factors previously set forth show that the monthly alimony payments set forth in the agreement constitute matrimonial obligation for alimony, maintenance or support for the wife, not a division of community property, making these payments nondischargeable under § 523(a)(5) of the Code.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) requires a debt labeled as alimony, maintenance, or support to actually have that character to be nondischargeable; a property settlement is dischargeable.

Mallisk v. Mallisk (In re Mallisk) · filed 1986-05-13(a)(5)(B)

Under these provisions, any obligation for alimony, maintenance, or support is not dischargeable. However, in order to be nondischargeable, a debt must actually be in the nature of alimony, maintenance and support. Any debt which actually constitutes a property settlement between the parties will be discharged.

Section 523(a)(5) makes a lump-sum divorce award nondischargeable when it is actually intended as support, even if it does not end upon death or remarriage.

Myers v. Myers (In Re Myers) · filed 1986-06-10(a)(5)

Although as Plaintiff-Debtor correctly points out, the lump sum award does not terminate upon Defendant’s death or remarriage, which is typically found in alimony awards, it is clearly designed to give Defendant support for living expenses for a period of seven years.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts divorce obligations from discharge when they function as spousal support rather than property division, including obligations for attorney fees, debt indemnification, and maintenance arrearages.

Anderson v. Anderson (In Re Anderson) · filed 1986-06-20(a)(5)

Consideration of all of the factors, with special emphasis on the facial language of Judge Lasley’s Decree, compels the conclusion that all of the awards at issue are in the nature of maintenance or spousal support rather than in the nature of property division. Thus, they are non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a divorce obligation from discharge when the parties intended it as a property settlement rather than support or maintenance.

Sullivan v. Sullivan (In Re Sullivan) · filed 1986-06-20(a)(5)

Since alimony was specifically waived by the Plaintiff and since this particular provision included the language “as a property settlement”, the parties did not evidence the requisite intent that this obligation be considered as support or maintenance. This conclusion is supported by the fact that the Plaintiff and the two children were awarded the mobile home and the real property on which it was located to be utilized by them for residential purposes. This obligation, therefore, is found to be dischargeable in its entirety.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts attorney fees from discharge when a custody proceeding's fee award is inseparable from child support.

Hill v. Snider (In Re Snider) · filed 1986-06-12(a)(5)

In this case, the attorney fee award is so intertwined with the child support issues so as to make them inseparable when determining the dischargeability of a debt. Having reached that conclusion, the attorney fees are non-dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) makes an alimony obligation nondischargeable when the award is actually for a former spouse’s support or maintenance; the jury’s instructions and verdict can establish that intent.

In the Matter of Larry Joe LONG, Debtor, Larry Joe LONG, Appellant, v. Penelope WEST, F/K/A Penelope West Long, Appellee · filed 1986-06-25(a)(5)(B)

In light of the Georgia trial court’s instructions to the jury that alimony is an award to a spouse for the spouse’s “support” (which we note is an explicit requirement of § 523(a)(5)(B)), we must defer to this explicitly rendered conclusion of intent by the state court jury.

Section 523(a)(5) makes divorce obligations intended as support nondischargeable, including children’s dental expenses and payments intended to supplement child support.

Spurgeon v. Spurgeon (In Re Spurgeon) · filed 1986-07-02(a)(5)

Under the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, a debtor’s alimony, maintenance, or support obligations pursuant to a divorce decree cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5). Property settlements, on the other hand, are subject to discharge.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a debt from discharge only if it is actually for alimony or support; its label does not control.

In Re Shaw · filed 1986-10-07(a)(5)

In order to constitute a nondischargeable debt under § 523(a)(5), the debt must actually be for or in the nature of alimony or support.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a promise to indemnify a former spouse from discharge when the promise is made in lieu of maintenance or support.

Horton v. Horton (In Re Horton) · filed 1986-10-22(a)(5)

A promise to indemnify and hold harmless such as the one found in the parties’ Separation Agreement can create an obligation nondischargeable in bankruptcy provided it is made in lieu of maintenance and support.

Section 523(a)(5)(A) does not treat child support arrears as assigned to a grandmother merely because the children lived with her and their mother paid her for their care.

Troxell v. Troxell (In Re Troxell) · filed 1986-11-19(a)(5)(A)

We note that the referee’s report indicates that the defendant has paid her mother for caring for the children throughout the years. We hold, on the undisputed facts before us, that there has not been an assignment of the child support arrearage from defendant to her mother under § 523(a)(5)(A).

Section 523(a)(5) does not except support obligations owed to an unmarried partner from discharge.

Niermeyer v. Doyle (In Re Doyle) · filed 1986-12-09(a)(5)

Niermeyer cannot claim she is entitled to protection given only to persons who have obtained the special status of marriage. Therefore, she cannot state a claim for relief under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) prevents discharge of a divorce obligation that is in the nature of alimony or support.

In Re Philip Kelley Goin, D/B/A Kelley's Auto Supply, Debtor. Philip Kelley Goin, D/B/A Kelley's Auto Supply v. Jo · filed 1987-01-12(a)(5)

The key issue is whether the $80,000 was alimony or a property settlement, since the express language of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) prohibits the discharge of an obligation for alimony or support.

Section 523(a)(5) makes an obligation actually in the nature of alimony nondischargeable regardless of the former spouse’s current need for support.

Forsdick v. Turgeon · filed 1987-02-27(a)(5)

Since such an obligation is nondischargeable under § 523(a)(5) of the bankruptcy code, the current needs of the wife notwithstanding, the husband was not entitled to discharge of the balance due on the $100,000 alimony award.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts genuine spousal support obligations from discharge, and courts may consider extrinsic evidence to determine an obligation’s true nature.

Bankr. L. Rep. P 71,748 in the Matter of Keith E. Benich, Debtor. Jane W. Benich v. Benich · filed 1987-03-10(a)(5)

The bankruptcy court may, therefore, consider extrinsic evidence to determine the real nature of the underlying obligation in order to determine its dischargeability.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts child support, alimony, and maintenance obligations from discharge even when the claim has been assigned to a governmental agency.

In Re Davidson · filed 1987-04-13(a)(5)

Thus, in general, a discharge in bankruptcy is not effective to discharge obligations owed for child support, alimony or maintenance, whether owed to a former spouse or child or to a governmental agency by way of assignment. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) makes divorce obligations nondischargeable when they actually provide alimony, maintenance, or support, including mortgage payments that house a former spouse and children.

Costell v. Costell (In Re Costell) · filed 1987-04-28(a)(5)

Under these provisions, any obligation for alimony, maintenance, or support is not dischargeable. ... For the above reasons, primarily that the Plaintiff and the children are living in the house in question, the mortgage payments are found to be nondischargeable.

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

Freyer v. Freyer (In Re Freyer) · filed 1987-03-30(a)(5)(B)

The plaintiff has not satisfied her burden of proof in the instant case of establishing that, in addition to the specific provisions for alimony, maintenance and support, the parties intended the obligations referred to in the separation agreement to constitute additional payments in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(B).

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

Guerron v. Grijalva (In Re Grijalva) · filed 1987-04-07(a)(5)

That section provides that an obligation incurred by the debtor in connection with a divorce decree or property settlement agreement is dischargable unless such liability is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) excepts divorce-related attorney’s fees from discharge when the obligation is actually in the nature of maintenance or support.

Doss, Puchalski, Keenan & Bargiel, Ltd. v. Cockhill (In Re Cockhill) · filed 1987-04-08(a)(5)(B)

This Court concludes that the debt- or’s obligation to pay the attorneys’ fees incurred by his spouse in this case is in the nature of maintenance and support and, therefore, nondischargeable under Section 523(a)(5)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 523(a)(5) makes marital debts assigned to a debtor in a divorce decree nondischargeable when they are intended as support for a former spouse or child.

Young v. Young (In Re Young) · filed 1987-04-15(a)(5)

Assignment of marital debts to the debtor in a divorce decree with a concomitant “hold harmless” agreement in favor of the former spouse can be a nondischargeable obligation if it is actually intended as maintenance or support for a former spouse or child of the debtor.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) does not apply to property interests fixed by a divorce decree before the bankruptcy petition.

Maiona v. Vassilowitch (In Re Vassilowitch) · filed 1987-04-21(a)(5)(B)

In other words, section 523(a)(5)(B) is simply not applicable where, as here, the property interests of the parties were fixed pre-petition.

Section 523(a)(5) requires consideration of whether an assumed joint debt was intended as support, provides necessary support, and is reasonable in amount when determining its dischargeability.

Lewis v. Richardson · filed 1987-04-29(a)(5)

This bankruptcy appeal arises from an order issued by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Judge Paine presiding, declaring an indebtedness to Commerce Union Bank nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5), because its assumption by the debtor was intended as alimony to or support of a spouse or child. ... Since Judge Paine apparently concluded his decision after the examination of only one factor — the intent of the parties — this case shall be remanded for a reconsideration of the dischargeability in light of the remaining three Calhoun factors.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts from discharge the actual expenses incurred enforcing a post-divorce custody order.

York v. Castro (In Re Castro) · filed 1987-05-21(a)(5)

The $23,000 debt found by the jury in the Kentucky state court action was for the actual expenses incurred in enforcing the post-divorce custody order and is an expense which is nondischargeable pursuant to § 523(a)(5).

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

Smith v. Billingsley (In Re Billingsley) · filed 1987-06-22(a)(5)

The Court finds that these debts are non-dischargeable, and that they are actually in the nature of alimony, support and maintenance.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts support obligations from discharge but permits discharge of obligations that are property division.

Hoivik-Olson v. Hoivik (In Re Hoivik) · filed 1987-07-01(a)(5)

If the obligation is in the nature of support it is not dischargeable; if it is in the nature of property division it is dis-chargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts obligations for alimony, maintenance, or support from discharge, but does not except a property settlement obligation.

Sharp v. Hysock (In Re Hysock) · filed 1987-06-16(a)(5)

Thus, Mrs. Hysock, now Mrs. Sharp, has the burden of proving the obligation was intended to provide alimony, maintenance or support and that the assumption of that obligation was necessary to provide for the continuing needs of the family. ... For the foregoing reasons, the court finds that debtor’s assumption of the second mortgage payments was part of a property settlement and was not intended as support and maintenance.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts obligations in the nature of child support from discharge, including related attorney fees.

Meadows v. Meadows (In Re Meadows) · filed 1987-07-17(a)(5)(B)

The Court holds that the public policy considerations of the duty of a parent to support a child, outweigh other factors in this case, and that this view is supported by the United States Congress in 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5)(B) and by the policies of the State of Texas as contained in the Texas Family Code. ... Therefore, for the reasons stated, the Court finds that one-half of the total amount received by the Debtor as net proceeds from his personal injury suit or settlement thereof, and $1,250.00 attorneys’ fees constitutes nondischargeable child support.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) requires a debt labeled as maintenance or support to actually serve that function to be excepted from discharge.

Shaw v. Phillips (In Re Phillips) · filed 1987-09-09(a)(5)(B)

The assumption of these debts by debtor was not “in the nature of” rehabilitative maintenance or support under § 523(a)(5)(B). Rather, these marital debts were assumed by the debtor as part of a property settlement in which plaintiff received net assets, including a home and business, with a value of $90,000.00 and debtor was apportioned a negative net asset value of ($41,039.75).

Section 523(a)(5) treats child support, pregnancy-related medical expenses, and paternity blood-test costs arising from a father’s failure to provide support as nondischargeable support obligations.

Fisher v. Valls (In Re Valls) · filed 1987-10-13(a)(5)

Section 523(a)(5) provides for non-dis-chargeability of obligations “in the nature of ... support.” This is not to be given a narrow reading in paternity or similar situations. ... The state court judgments had their direct genesis in the father’s failure to provide support and are not dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5)(B) does not permit a court to reassess a support obligation based on the parties’ changed financial circumstances.

Stone v. Stone (In Re Stone) · filed 1987-11-09(a)(5)(B)

The language of § 523(a)(5)(B) does not invite an inquiry into present circumstances such as is required by § 523(a)(8)(B).

Section 523(a)(5)(B) requires a bankruptcy court to determine whether a divorce-related debt is actually support, even when an unambiguous agreement labels it as support.

Roberts v. Poole · filed 1987-11-25(a)(5)(B)

In sum, where a creditor seeks to have a debt declared nondischargeable on the grounds that it constitutes alimony, maintenance, or support, the bankruptcy court not only may, but it must independently determine the parties' intent and, in turn, the nature of the debt. In making this inquiry the bankruptcy court is not limited to cases involving claims of deceit, fraud, or malicious conversion, or to cases which require the interpretation of a state court decision. While the characterization placed upon the debt by a separation agreement or divorce decree has probative value and may be considered by the trier of fact to evidence the parties’ intent, that characterization is not determinative even where the characterization is unambiguous.

Section 523(a)(5) makes a divorce debt nondischargeable when it is in substance maintenance or support, even if state law treats it as a property settlement.

In Re Marriage of Rowden · filed 1987-12-10(a)(5)

Considering these factors, and despite the fact that we have found that under Illinois law the loan obligation did not terminate on the wife’s remarriage, we find that under Federal bankruptcy law the instant car loan was “in the nature of maintenance.” Consequently, the loan was nondischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) makes divorce-related mortgage payments nondischargeable when they are support rather than a property settlement; the recipient spouse may prove that by a preponderance of the evidence.

Lopez v. Lopez (Inre Lopez) · filed 1987-12-10(a)(5)

Further, in adversary proceedings under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5), a preponderance of the evidence is sufficient for Mrs. Lopez to sustain her burden of proof. Therefore, in accordance with the prior findings of the state court which has considered this matter, the second mortgage payments on the Lopez’ house paid by the debtor are found to be support payments to Mrs. Lopez. ... Therefore, such payments are non-dischargeable in the debtor’s Chapter 7 proceeding.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts from discharge an obligation to transfer unencumbered property to a former spouse when the transfer is intended to provide maintenance and support.

Green v. Green (In re Green) · filed 1987-12-10(a)(5)

As set forth herein, the Court finds that the obligation owed the former wife, pursuant to the paragraph of the letter agreement requiring the Debtor to transfer commercial real estate to his former wife, free of encumbrances, for her income benefit, is in the nature of maintenance and support and, therefore, constitutes a nondischargeable debt, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a divorce property settlement from discharge when the obligations are property division rather than alimony or support.

Smith v. Smith (In Re Smith) · filed 1988-01-13(a)(5)

I find that the Settlement in this case is not alimony, but strictly a property settlement under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(5), and therefore the debts are dischargeable.

Section 523(a)(5) does not except a divorce judgment from discharge when the judgment divides property rather than provides alimony, maintenance, or support.

Harrison v. Harrison (In Re Harrison) · filed 1988-01-29(a)(5)

The issue for the determination of the court is whether the state court judgment for $12,800 against the debtor for the benefit of plaintiff was in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5). ... The Court finds that the judgment of $12,800 to plaintiff was in the nature of a property division and this debt is discharge-able in bankruptcy.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts attorney’s fees for a visitation dispute connected to a divorce decree from discharge when the dispute is sufficiently related to child support.

Dellapa v. Vazquez (In Re Vasquez) · filed 1988-02-03(a)(5)

I rejected this contention and held: “that visitation is sufficiently related to child support so as to bring the award of attorney’s fees to the plaintiff within the purview of § 523(a)(5) which mandates that child support awards are not dis-chargeable.”

Section 523(a)(5) asks whether a divorce obligation would have provided necessary support at any time from when it became due through the dischargeability decision.

Swiczkowski v. Neagley (In Re Swiczkowski) · filed 1988-03-03(a)(5)

This Court will determine whether the divorce related obligation would have provided necessary support at any time from the date the obligation became due to the date the obligation is submitted to this Court for a decision on dis-chargeability under § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) makes payments that are substantively alimony or support nondischargeable; their character depends on the parties’ intent when they made the agreement.

Foss v. Foss (In re Foss) · filed 1988-06-29(a)(5)

This is an appeal of the bankruptcy court’s order that monthly payments from one former spouse to another labeled “alimony” in the divorce settlement are alimony and thus not dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5). Having found the payments nondischargeable as alimony, the bankruptcy court refused to hear testimony regarding the present changed circumstances of the parties. The bankruptcy court is affirmed because its finding of fact that the agreement in question was alimony is not clearly erroneous.

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a parent's obligation to reimburse a county for child support expenses from discharge when the debt is substantively support.

Lake County Department of Public Welfare v. Burton (In Re Burton) · filed 1988-05-26(a)(5)

The debtor’s obligation owed to the county is thus in the nature of child support and hence the Court finds that such debt is excepted from discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5).

Section 523(a)(5) excepts a hold harmless obligation from discharge when it is in the nature of support.

Stockdill v. Stockdill (In Re Stockdill) · filed 1988-06-22(a)(5)

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the obligation of the defendant to pay all family bills incurred during the marriage and to ... hold his ex-wife harmless from the creditors’ efforts in making her pay those bills is in the nature of support and thus nondis-chargeable.