Taylor v. Taylor (In re Eloisa Maria Taylor)

Summarized by Steven Mulligan , Coan, Payton & Payne, LLC
12 years 2 months ago

Citation:

Taylor v. Taylor (In re Taylor), Case Nos. 12-2163 & 12-2167 (B.A.P. 10th Cir. December 9, 2013) (published)

Tag(s):

Ruling:

§ 523(a)(5) requires that the party seeking to have a debt declared non-dischargeable prove that the debt is in the nature of support to that party and it is the substance of the agreement that prevails and not the label that the parties give to those payments and that determination is a question of federal law. Under § 523(a)(15), the party must show that the debt arose in the course of a divorce or in connection with a separation agreement, divorce decree or other order of a court of record.

Procedural context:

The Bankruptcy Court dismissed the plaintiff’s § 523(a)(5) claim because he failed to allege any facts to support his claim that support overpayments to the debtor were in the nature of support to him and thus, the debt was not a domestic support obligation. The Bankruptcy Court found that the overpayments were non-dischargeable under § 523(a)(15) since the debt represented by the overpayments arose in connection with a state court divorce decree and thus, was non-dischargeable under the plain meaning of § 523(a)(15). The BAP affirmed as did the 10th Circuit. The 10th Circuit refused to apply the “absurdity doctrine” which applies to unambiguous statutes and is used when an interpretation of a statute leads to results so gross as to shock the general moral or common sense. Since the parties were arguing that the Bankruptcy Court erred in its interpretation of the Bankruptcy Code, the Bankruptcy Court’s decision was reviewed de novo.

Facts:

Prepetition, debtor and her spouse divorced and the non-debtor spouse was ordered to make support payments until, among other things, the debtor remarried. The non-debtor spouse learned that for two years, the debtor was living with another man and claimed that this resulted in the termination of spousal support payments when the debtor began living with the other man. A state court agreed and entered judgment in favor of the non-debtor spouse in an amount equal to the payments made during those two years. The debtor then filed bankruptcy.

Judge(s):

Briscoe, Seymour, Lucero (Briscoe)

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary. Please Sign In using your ABI Member credentials. Not a Member yet? Join ABI now - it is absolutely worth it!