Alfes v. Educational Credit Management Corp. (In re Alfes)
- Summarized by Timothy Brink , Meltzer Purtill & Stelle LLC
- 11 years 10 months ago
- Citation:
- Alfes v. Educational Credit Management Corp. (In re Alfes), Case No. 11-2159 (6th Cir. Mar. 12, 2013)
- Tag(s):
-
- Ruling:
- The Sixth Circuit affirmed the rulings below that a default judgment against a student loan lender did not bar the separate claims of the guarantor of the debtor’s nondischargeable student loan debt, and that the guarantor’s amended declaratory judgment complaint clarifying that it asserted its rights against the debtor in its capacity as guarantor related back to the guarantor’s original complaint and therefore should not be dismissed as untimely.
- Procedural context:
- The debtor appealed from the judgment of the district court affirming the bankruptcy court decision granting summary judgment in favor of the guarantor of the debtor’s nondischargeable student loan debt on the guarantor’s complaint seeking a declaratory judgment that the debtor’s student loan debt was nondischargeable.
- Facts:
- The debtor filed a chapter 7 petition, obtained a general discharge, and initiated an adversary proceeding seeking a declaration that his consolidated student loan debt was no longer an “educational loan” and therefore had been discharged along with his ordinary debt. The bankruptcy court granted the motion of ECMC, as assignee of the guarantor, to dismiss the debtor’s complaint, which decision the debtor did not appeal. After ECMC transferred the debt back to the original lender for collection, the debtor sought to reopen the adversary proceeding and to enjoin collection by the original lender, against whom a default judgment previously had been entered. In response, the original lender transferred the debt back to ECMC, which initiated a second adversary proceeding seeking a declaration that the debtor’s student loan debt was nondischargeable. After ECMC amended its complaint to clarify that it asserted its rights against the debtor in its capacity as guarantor, the debtor moved to dismiss the complaint. The bankruptcy court denied the debtor’s motion to dismiss ECMC’s complaint and granted ECMC’s motion for summary judgment, holding that its order dismissing the debtor’s complaint seeking a declaration that his student loan debt was dischargeable had preclusive effect in the second adversary proceeding.
- Judge(s):
- Boggs and White, Circuit Judges; Black, District Judge
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!
