in re: tarra nichole christoff, 9th cir. bap (2015)

7/25/2019 In re: Tarra Nichole Christoff, 9th Cir. BAP (2015)

1/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

FILEDMAR 27 2015

SUSAN M. SPRAUL, CU.S. BKCY. APP. PANOF THE NINTH CIRCU

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL

OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT

I n r e: ) BAP No. NC- 14- 1336- PaJ uTa)

TARRA NI CHOLE CHRI STOFF, ) Bk. No. 13- 10808)

Debt or . ) Adv. No. 13- 3186___________________________________)

))

I NSTI TUTE OF I MAGI NAL STUDI ES )dba MERI DI AN UNI VERSI TY, )

))

Appel l ant , ))v. ) O P I N I O N

))

TARRA NI CHOLE CHRI STOFF, )))

Appel l ee. )___________________________________)

Ar gued and Submi t t ed on Febr uar y 19, 2015at San Fr anci sco, Cal i f or ni a

Fi l ed - Mar ch 27, 2015____________

Appeal f r om t he Uni t ed St at es Bankrupt cy Cour tf or t he Nor t her n Di st r i ct of Cal i f or ni a

Hon. Denni s Mont al i , U. S. Bankrupt cy J udge, Pr esi di ng

Appear ances: Scot t D. Schwar t z of Rust , Ar meni s & Schwar t z, P. C.ar gued f or Appel l ant I nst i t ut e of I magi nal St udi es

d/ b/ a Mer i di an Uni ver si t y; Li ndsay Tor ger son ofWi ne Count r y Fami l y Law & Bankr upt cy Of f i ce arguedf or Appel l ee Tar r a Ni chol e Chr i st of f .

Bef ore: PAPPAS, J URY, and TAYLOR, Bankr upt cy J udges.


2/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

PAPPAS, Bankr upt cy J udge:

Thi s appeal r ai ses an i mpor t ant i ssue of f i r st i mpress i on

concer ni ng t he scope of t he except i on t o di schar ge f or st udent

debt s i n bankr upt cy. Cr edi t or I nst i t ut e of I magi nal St udi es d/ b/ a

Mer i di an Uni ver si t y ( Mer i di an) appeal s t he summary j udgment of

t he bankr upt cy cour t determi ni ng t hat t he debt owed t o Mer i di an by

chapt er 71 debt or Tar r a Ni chol e Chr i st of f ( Debt or ) was not

except ed f r om di schar ge pur suant t o 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) . Based

upon t he pl ai n l anguage of t he Bankr upt cy Code, we AFFI RM.

I. FACTS2

A. Relationship of the Parties.

Mer i di an i s a f or - pr of i t Cal i f or ni a cor por at i on whi ch

oper at es a pr i vat e uni ver si t y l i censed under Cal i f or ni a s Pr i vat e

Post Secondary Educat i on Act of 2009, Cal . Educ. Code 94800, et

seq. I f a gr aduat e of Mer i di an f ul f i l l s ot her post - gr aduat e

r equi r ement s, t he gr aduat e may obt ai n a l i cense f r om Cal i f or ni a t o

pr act i ce as an i ndependent , unsuper vi sed psychol ogi st .

Debt or appl i ed f or admi ssi on t o Mer i di an i n 2002. Mer i di an

agr eed t o admi t Debt or and of f er ed her $6, 000 i n f i nanci al ai d t o

pay a por t i on of t he t ui t i on f or t hat school year . Under t hi s

ar r angement , Debt or di d not r ecei ve any act ual f unds f r om

1 Unl ess ot her wi se i ndi cat ed, al l chapt er , sect i on and r ul e

r ef er ences ar e t o t he Bankrupt cy Code, 11 U. S. C. 101- 1532, andt o the Feder al Rul es of Bankrupt cy Pr ocedur e, Rul es 1001- 9037.Ci vi l Rul e r ef er ences ar e t o t he Feder al Rul es of Ci vi lProcedur e 1- 86.

2 Thi s r eci t at i on of t he undi sput ed f act s i s t aken pr i mar i l yf r om t he bankr upt cy cour t s deci si on, whi ch nei t her of t he par t i eshas chal l enged.

- 2-


3/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Mer i di an, but i nst ead she r ecei ved a t ui t i on cr edi t . Debt or

si gned an enr ol l ment agr eement acknowl edgi ng Mer i di an s of f er t o

f i nance $6, 000 of t he tui t i on, and she si gned a pr omi ssory not e

i n f avor of Mer i di an evi denci ng her obl i gat i on. The pr omi ssor y

not e pr ovi ded t hat t he debt f or t he t ui t i on cr edi t was t o be pai d

by Debt or i n i nst al l ment s of $350 per mont h af t er Debt or compl eted

her cour se wor k or wi t hdr ew f r om Mer i di an. I nt er est accr ued on

t he unpai d bal ance of t he not e at ni ne percent per annum,

compounded mont hl y.

I n 2003, Debt or submi t t ed a si mi l ar appl i cat i on, and Mer i di an

gr ant ed her a f i nanci al ai d awar d of $5, 000 f or t hat school year .As bef or e, Debt or si gned a pr omi ssor y not e f or $5, 000. Agai n,

Debt or di d not r ecei ve any f unds but i nst ead r ecei ved a t ui t i on

cr edi t . The pr omi ssor y not e cont ai ned payment t erms i dent i cal t o

t hose i n t he pr i or not e.

Debt or compl eted her cour se work at Mer i di an, and Debt or s

not e payment s began i n Oct ober 2005. Af t er maki ng sever al

payment s on t he notes, i n 2009, Debt or sought a def err al of her

payment s f or a per i od of one year . Mer i di an gr ant ed t he

extensi on. Al so i n 2009, Debt or wi t hdr ew f r om Mer i di an wi t hout

compl et i ng her di sser t at i on, a r equi r ement f or obt ai ni ng her

degr ee.

Af t er t he extensi on expi r ed, Debt or di d not pay t he amount s

due under t he t wo pr omi ssor y not es. Ther eaf t er , Mer i di an

unsuccessf ul l y at t empt ed t o col l ect t he bal ance due f r om Debt or .

Event ual l y, Mer i di an and Debt or agr eed t o submi t Mer i di an s cl ai ms

t o ar bi t r at i on under a pr ovi si on i n t he enr ol l ment agr eement . I n

J ul y 2012, an ar bi t r at or or dered Debt or t o pay Mer i di an t he unpai d

- 3-


4/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

bal ance due on t he pr omi ssory notes, $5, 950, pl us accr ued

i nt eres t .

B. The Bankruptcy Case and Adversary Proceeding.

Debt or f i l ed a chapt er 7 bankrupt cy pet i t i on on August 19,

2013. Debt or l i st ed Mer i di an i n schedul e F as an unsecur ed,

nonpr i or i t y cr edi t or . Mer i di an commenced an adver sary pr oceedi ng

agai nst Debt or seeki ng a determi nat i on by the bankr upt cy cour t

t hat t he debt owed by Debt or t o Mer i di an was except ed f r om

di schar ge pur suant t o 523( a) ( 8) .

On Apr i l 30, 2014, Mer i di an f i l ed a mot i on f or summar y

j udgment . I n i t s mot i on, Mer i di an conceded t hat Debt or s debt di dnot qual i f y f or an except i on t o di schar ge under ei t her

523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i ) or ( a) ( 8) ( B) . 3 However , i t argued t hat t he debt

was except ed f r om di schar ge under 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) . Debt or

di sput ed t hat t hi s Code pr ovi si on appl i ed t o her debt t o

Mer i di an. 4 The par t i es appear ed at a mot i on hear i ng on May 30,

2014, pr esent ed t hei r argument s, and t he bankr upt cy cour t t ook the

i ssues under advi sement .

On J une 11, 2014, t he bankrupt cy cour t ent er ed a Memorandum

Deci si on i n whi ch i t hel d t hat Debt or s debt t o Mer i di an di d not

3 We agr ee t hat Mer i di an cannot t ake advant age of t hesedi schar ge except i ons because i t was nei t her a government al uni tnor a nonpr of i t i nst i t ut i on as r equi r ed f or an except i on under 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i ) , nor was t he debt i n t hi s case a qual i f i ed

educat i on l oan as def i ned by t he I nt er nal Revenue Code, acondi t i on f or an except i on t o di schar ge under 523( a) ( 8) ( B) .

4 The par t i es agr eed t hat i f t he bankrupt cy cour t det ermi nedt hat t he Mer i di an debt qual i f i ed f or an except i on t o di schar geunder 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) , Debt or woul d be al l owed t o amend heranswer and pl ead that she coul d not r epay t he debt wi t hout anundue hardshi p.

- 4-


5/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

qual i f y f or an except i on t o di schar ge under 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) .

I nst . of I magi nal St udi es dba Mer i di an Uni v. v. Chr i st of f ( I n r e

Chr i st of f ) , 510 B. R. 876, 884 ( Bankr . N. D. Ca. 2014) . I n maki ng

t hi s r ul i ng, t he bankrupt cy cour t not ed t hat t he quest i on r ai sed

by the mot i on was an i ssue of f i r st i mpr essi on i n t he Ni nt h

Ci r cui t f ol l owi ng enact ment of t he Bankrupt cy Abuse Pr event i on and

Consumer Protect i on Act of 2005 (BAPCPA) . 5 Af t er a t hor ough

r evi ew of amended 523( a) ( 8) and t he cases addr essi ng t he i ssue,

t he bankr upt cy cour t concl uded:

[ b] ecause Debt or s obl i gat i ons underappl i cabl e document s were t o pay t he amount

under t he [ p] r omi ssor y [ n] ot es, and t her eaf t ert he ar bi t r at i on awar d, but di d not f l ow f r om f unds r ecei ved ei t her by her as t he st udentor by Mer i di an f r om any ot her sour ce, t he debti s not cover ed by [ 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) ] and i st her ef or e el i gi bl e f or di schar ge i n Debt or sdi schar ge.

I n r e Chr i st of f , 510 B. R. at 884.

I nt er pr et i ng t he f unds r ecei ved r equi r ement i n

523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) , t he bankr upt cy cour t expl ai ned t hat Mer i di an

si mpl y agr eed t o be pai d t he t ui t i on l at er . . . [ i ] t di d not

r ecei ve any f unds, such as f r om a t hi r d par t y f i nanci ng sour ce.

I d. at 879. The bankrupt cy cour t t her ef or e concl uded t hat , whi l e

t he t r ansact i ons bet ween Debt or and Mer i di an wer e cl ear l y l oans,

523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) does not ext end t o l oans but , i nst ead, gr ant s

an except i on t o di schar ge f or an obl i gat i on t o r epay f unds

r ecei ved. I d. at 879. The bankrupt cy cour t observed t hat BAPCPA

had amended t he pr i or ver si on of 523( a) ( 8) and had cr eat ed a

newl y separ at ed [ 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) , whi ch] r ef er s t o an

5 Pub. L. No. 109- 8, 119 St at . 23.

- 5-


6/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

obl i gat i on t o r epay f unds r ecei ved as an educat i onal benef i t ,

schol ar shi p[ , ] or st i pend, wi t hout r ef er ence t o educat i onal l oans

or any ot her ki nd of l oan. I d.

Mer i di an f i l ed a not i ce of appeal concerni ng t he Memorandum

Deci si on on J une 26, 2014. The bankrupt cy cour t , on J ul y 2, 2014,

ent ered an order gr ant i ng summary j udgment i n f avor of Debt or and

denyi ng Mer i di an s mot i on f or summary j udgment ; i t al so ent ered a

j udgment i ncor por at i ng t hese r ul i ngs. On J ul y 11, 2014, Mer i di an

f i l ed an amended not i ce of appeal t o i ncl ude the or der and

j udgment ent er ed by t he bankr upt cy cour t .

II. JURISDICTION

The bankrupt cy cour t had j ur i sdi ct i on under 28 U. S. C. 1334

and 157( b) ( 2) ( I ) . We have j ur i sdi ct i on under 28 U. S. C. 158.

III. ISSUE

Whether t he bankrupt cy cour t er r ed i n hol di ng t hat t he

Mer i di an debt was not except ed f r omdi schar ge under

523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) because i t was not an obl i gat i on f or f unds

r ecei ved.

IV. STANDARDS OF REVIEW

We r evi ew a bankr upt cy cour t s grant of summary j udgment de

novo. The Pr esi dent & Bd. of Ohi o Uni v. v. Hawki ns ( I n r e

Hawki ns) , 317 B. R. 104, 108 ( 9t h Ci r . BAP 2004) , af f d, 469 F. 3d

1316 ( 9t h Ci r . 2006) ; Thor son v. Cal . St udent Ai d Comm n ( I n r e

Thor son) , 195 B. R. 101, 103 ( 9th Ci r . BAP 1996) ( ci t i ng J ones v.

Uni on Pac. R. R. Co. , 968 F. 2d 937, 940 ( 9t h Ci r . 1992) ) .

Accor di ng t o Ci vi l Rul e 56, made appl i cabl e t o adver sary

pr oceedi ngs i n Rul e 7056, summar y j udgment i s appr opr i at e i f t her e

i s a showi ng t hat t her e i s no genui ne di sput e as t o any mat er i al

- 6-


7/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

f act and t he movant i s ent i t l ed t o j udgment as a mat t er of l aw.

Ci vi l Rul e 56( a) ; Cel ot ex Cor p. v. Cat r et t , 477 U. S. 317, 322

( 1986) . A t r i al cour t , i n t he exer ci se of i t s di scret i on, may

gr ant a summary j udgment f or a nonmovant pur suant t o Ci vi l Rul e

56( f ) ( 1) .

We revi ew de novo t he bankrupt cy cour t s appl i cat i on of t he

l egal st andar d i n det er mi ni ng whet her a st udent l oan debt i s

di schar geabl e. Educ. Cr edi t Mgmt . Cor p. v. J or gensen ( I n r e

J or gensen) , 479 B. R. 79, 85 ( 9th Ci r . BAP 2012) ( ci t i ng Ri f i no v.

Uni t ed St at es ( I n r e Ri f i no) , 245 F. 3d 1083, 1087 ( 9t h Ci r .

2001) ) . To t he extent t he bankrupt cy cour t i nt er pr et ed st at ut or yl aw, we r evi ew t he i ssues of l aw de novo. I n r e Thor son, 195

B. R. at 103.

V. DISCUSSION

A. Arguments of the Parties.

Mer i di an ar gues t hat t he bankrupt cy cour t err ed when i t

i nt er pr et ed 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) t o r equi r e t hat act ual f unds be

r ecei ved by a debt or i n or der f or a debt t o qual i f y f or an

except i on t o di schar ge under t hat pr ovi si on. Accor di ng t o

Mer i di an, f unds r ecei ved, as t hat l anguage i s used i n

523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) , i s t he equi val ent t o l oans r ecei ved by t he

debt or , as descr i bed i n t he ot her pr ovi si ons of 523( a) ( 8) . To

suppor t t hi s argument , Mer i di an ci t es t o McKay v. I ngl eson, 558

F. 3d 888 ( 9t h Ci r . 2009) , and t o J ohnson v. Mo. Bapt i st Col l . ( I n

r e J ohnson) , 218 B. R. 449 ( 8t h Ci r . BAP 1998) , a deci si on ci t ed

and r el i ed upon by t he Ni nt h Ci r cui t i n McKay. Mer i di an ar gues

t hat t he bankrupt cy cour t er r ed i n di st i ngui shi ng t hese cases

because t hose deci si ons det er mi ned that a l oan under 523( a) ( 8)

- 7-


8/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

r equi r ed no f unds t o be t r ansf er r ed t o a debt or . Mer i di an ar gues

t hat si nce t he t erms l oan and f unds r ecei ved are synonymous as

used i n 523( a) ( 8) , McKay and I n r e J ohnson cont r ol t he out come

i n t hi s case.

Debt or poi nt s t o t he di f f er ence i n t he l anguage empl oyed by

Congr ess t o del i neat e what t ypes of st udent debt s ar e except ed

f r om di schar ge under 523( a) ( 8) . Whi l e 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i ) and ( B)

i ndeed make l oans nondi schargeabl e i n bankr upt cy, absent undue

har dshi p, 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) appl i es t o a di f f er ent t ype of debt :

a debt or s obl i gat i on t o repay f unds r ecei ved as an educat i onal

benef i t , schol ar shi p, or st i pend [ . ] Because Congr ess di d notr ef er t o l oans i n t hi s subsect i on of t he Code, Debt or ur ges t hat

i t was i nt ended t o appl y t o a di st i nct l y di f f er ent t ype of debt ,

an obl i gat i on t o r epay the cr edi t or f or f unds r ecei ved.

Ther ef or e, Debt or ar gues, i t i s i nappr opr i at e t o bor r ow f r om t he

l ogi c of t he cases const r ui ng t he l oan l anguage used i n t he

other st udent debt except i ons t o const r ue t he meani ng of f unds

r ecei ved i n 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) .

We agr ee wi t h Debt or .

B. Statutory Interpretation and Exceptions to Discharge.

Any anal ysi s of t he Bankrupt cy Code begi ns wi t h t he t ext of

t he st at ut e. Ransom v. FI A Car d Ser vs. , N. A. , 562 U. S. 61, 69

( 2011) ; Dani el son v. Fl or es ( I n r e Fl or es) , 735 F. 3d 855, 859 ( 9t h

Ci r . 2013) ( en banc) ( ci t i ng Mi r anda v. Anchondo, 684 F. 3d 844,

849 ( 9t h Ci r . 2011) . Fur t hermor e, t he wor ds of [ t he Code] must

be r ead i n t hei r cont ext and wi t h a vi ew t o t hei r pl ace i n t he

over al l st at ut or y scheme. I n r e Fl or es, 735 F. 3d at 859

( quot i ng Gal e v. Fi r st Frankl i n Loan Ser vs. , 701 F. 3d 1240, 1244

- 8-


9/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

( 9t h Ci r . 2012) ) . I f t he st at ut or y l anguage i s unambi guous and

t he st at ut or y scheme i s coher ent and consi st ent , j udi ci al i nqui r y

must cease. Fi r eman s Fund I ns. Co. v. Pl ant I nsul at i on Co. ( I n

r e Pl ant I nsul at i on Co. ) , 734 F. 3d 900, 910 ( 9t h Ci r . 2013)

( ci t at i ons and i nt er nal quot at i on mar ks omi t t ed) .

Cour t s must l i mi t t he pr ovi si ons gr ant i ng except i ons t o

di schar ge t o t hose pl ai nl y expr essed i n 523( a) . Bul l ock v.

BankChampai gn, N. A. , 133 S. Ct . 1754, 1760 ( 2013) ( not i ng t he

l ong- st andi ng pr i nci pl e t hat except i ons t o di schar ge shoul d be

conf i ned t o those pl ai nl y expr essed) ( i nt er nal quot at i ons mar ks

and ci t at i ons omi t t ed) ; Hawki ns v. Franchi se Tax Bd. of Cal . , 769

F. 3d 662, 666 ( 9t h Ci r . 2014) ( r emi ndi ng t hat t he Supr eme Cour t

has i nt er pr et ed except i ons t o t he br oad pr esumpt i on of di schar ge

nar r owl y) ; Sachan v. Huh ( I n r e Huh) , 506 B. R. 257, 263 ( 9t h Ci r .

BAP 2014) ( en banc) ( st at i ng t he except i on t o di schar ge

pr ovi si ons of t he Bankr upt cy Code ar e i nt er pr et ed st r i ct l y i n

f avor of debt or s) ; Benson v. Cor bi n ( I n r e Cor bi n) , 506 B. R. 287,

291 ( Bankr . W. D. Wa. 2014) ( observi ng, i n a 523( a) ( 8) case, t hat[ c] our t s const r ue except i ons t o di schar ge st r i ct l y agai nst a

credi t or and l i ber al l y i n f avor of t he debt or ) .

B. The Pre-BAPCPA 523(a)(8).

The st udent debt except i on t o di schar ge, embodi ed i n

523( a) ( 8) , has been amended several t i mes over t he years, most

r ecent l y by BAPCPA i n 2005.

Pr i or t o BAPCPA, 523( a) ( 8) pr ovi ded t hat a bankrupt cy

di schar ge woul d not appl y t o a debt f or :

an educat i onal benef i t over payment or l oanmade, i nsured or guarant eed by a government aluni t , or made under any pr ogr amf unded i n

- 9-


10/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

whol e or i n par t by a gover nment al uni t , ornonpr of i t i nst i t ut i on, or f or an obl i gat i on t or epay f unds r ecei ved as an educat i onalbenef i t , schol ar shi p, or st i pend, unl essexcept i ng such debt f r om di schar ge under t hi sparagr aph wi l l i mpose an undue hardshi p on t hedebt or and the debt or s dependent s.

I n r e Hawki ns, 317 B. R. at 108 ( quot i ng 523( a) ( 8) ) .

I nt er pr et i ng t hi s ver si on of 523( a) ( 8) , t he Panel st at ed,

[ g] ener al l y speaki ng, debt s t hat ar e pot ent i al l ynondi schar geabl e under 523( a) ( 8) f al l i nt o twocat egor i es: 1) debt s f or educat i onal benef i toverpayment s or l oans made, i nsur ed, or guarant eed by agover nment al uni t or nonpr of i t i nst i t ut i on; or 2) debt sf or obl i gat i ons t o r epay f unds r ecei ved as aneducat i onal benef i t , schol ar shi p[ , ] or st i pend.

I d. at 109 ( ci t i ng Mehl man v. N. Y. Ci t y Bd. of Educ. ( I n r eMehl man) , 268 B. R. 379, 383 (Bankr . S. D. N. Y. 2001) ) .

I n I n r e Hawki ns, t he Panel exami ned an agr eement bet ween t he

debt or and Ohi o Uni ver si t y wherei n t he debt or agr eed, i n exchange

f or admi ssi on t o t he Uni ver si t y s medi cal school , t hat when she

compl et ed her st udi es she woul d pr act i ce medi ci ne i n Ohi o f or at

l east f i ve year s af t er l i censur e. 317 B. R. at 107. I f she f ai l ed

t o do t hi s, t he agr eement pr ovi ded t hat she woul d pay l i qui dat ed

damages t o t he Uni ver si t y. I d. The debt or graduat ed but prompt l y

moved t o a di f f er ent st at e. I d. The Uni ver si t y sued t he debt or

i n st at e cour t and obt ai ned a money j udgment f or t he l i qui dat ed

damages speci f i ed i n t he agr eement . I d. The debt or f i l ed f or

chapt er 7 r el i ef , and t he Uni ver si t y sought a det er mi nat i on f r om

t he bankr upt cy cour t t hat t he j udgment debt was except ed f r om

di schar ge under 523( a) ( 8) . I d. at 108. Appl yi ng 523( a) ( 8) t o

t hese f act s, t he Panel addr essed bot h cat egor i es of debt cover ed

by t he di schar ge except i on. I d. at 110- 11.

Fi r st , t he Panel concl uded that t he agr eement bet ween the

- 10-


11/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

debt or and the Uni ver si t y was not an educat i onal l oan because

whi l e an educat i onal l oan need not i ncl ude an act ual t r ansf er of

money . . . t o [ t he d] ebt or , i n or der f or i t t o f al l wi t hi n t he

def i ni t i on of . . . 523( a) ( 8) , t he l oan i nst r ument must

suf f i ci ent l y ar t i cul at e def i ni t e r epayment t er ms and t he r epayment

obl i gat i on must r ef l ect t he val ue of t he benef i t act ual l y r ecei ved

[ by t he debt or ] , r at her t han some ot her i l l def i ned measur e of

damages or penal t y. I d. at 110 ( emphasi s del et ed) .

Next , t he Panel consi dered whether t he agr eement cr eat ed a

debt f or an obl i gat i on t o r epay f unds r ecei ved as an educat i onal

benef i t . I d. at 112. The Panel qui ckl y concl uded t hat i t di dnot , because t he pl ai n l anguage of t hi s pr ong of t he st at ut e

r equi r es t hat a debt or r ecei ve act ual f unds i n or der t o obt ai n a

nondi schar geabl e educat i onal benef i t . I d. ( ci t i ng Cazenovi a

Col l . v. Renshaw ( I n r e Renshaw) , 229 B. R. 552, 555 n. 5 ( 2d Ci r .

BAP 1999) , af f d, 222 F. 3d 82 ( 2d Ci r . 2000) ) . The Uni ver si t y

appeal ed t he BAP s deci si on and t he Ni nt h Ci r cui t af f i r med,

adopt i ng t he opi ni on of t he BAP as i t s own. See Ohi o Uni v. v.

Hawki ns ( I n r e Hawki ns) , 469 F. 3d 1316, 1317 ( 9t h Ci r . 2006) ( We

adopt t he opi ni on of t he BAP, whi ch i s r epor t ed at 317 B. R. 104,

and af f i r m i t s j udgment . ) .

A f ew year s l at er , t he Ni nt h Ci r cui t agai n addr essed whet her

an agr eement between a st udent and a col l ege const i t ut ed a l oan

f or pur poses of t he pr e- BAPCPA ver si on of 523( a) ( 8) . I n McKay

v. I ngl eson, 558 F. 3d 888, 889 ( 9t h Ci r . 2009) , t he cour t r evi ewed

an agr eement between the debt or and Vanderbi l t Uni ver si t y t hat

def er r ed payment of t he debt or s t ui t i on and cost s of ot her

educat i onal ser vi ces t o mont hl y bi l l s t o be sent t o t he debt or .

- 11-


12/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

I d. I f t he debt or di d not pay t he bi l l s as t hey became due, a

l at e f ee woul d be assessed. I d. The debt or di d not pay t he bi l l s

as agr eed and l at er f i l ed f or bankrupt cy r el i ef . A coupl e of

year s af t er t he debt or r ecei ved her di schar ge, t he Uni ver si t y sued

t he debt or i n st ate cour t t o recover t he amount s owed under t he

agr eement . I n r esponse, t he debtor commenced an adversary

pr oceedi ng agai nst t he Uni ver si t y i n t he bankrupt cy cour t cl ai mi ng

t hat t he Uni ver si t y vi ol at ed t he di schar ge i nj unct i on of 524( a)

by pr osecut i ng t he st at e cour t act i on. I d. The bankrupt cy cour t ,

and l at er t he di st r i ct cour t on appeal , concl uded t hat no

vi ol at i on of t he di schar ge i nj unct i on occur r ed because t he debt ati ssue was except ed f r om di schar ge under 523( a) ( 8) . I d. The

Ni nt h Ci r cui t af f i r med, r easoni ng t hat t he agr eement bet ween t he

par t i es was a nondi schar geabl e l oan under 523( a) ( 8) , and t hat

i t di d not mat t er t hat no act ual money had changed hands between

t he par t i es under t hei r ar r angement . I d. at 890. I n expl ai ni ng

i t s deci si on, t he cour t ci t ed t o I n r e J ohnson, 218 B. R. 449 ( 8t h

Ci r . BAP 1998) . I d. The cour t al so ci t ed t o t he BAP s opi ni on i n

I n r e Hawki ns f or t he pr oposi t i on t hat t he amount of t he l oan must

be based on t he amount of benef i t t he debt or r ecei ved; t he cour t

concl uded that t he l oan i n McKay compl i ed wi t h that r equi r ement .

I d. at 891.

I n r e J ohnson, t he deci si on r el i ed upon by the Ni nt h

Ci r cui t i n McKay, addr essed what const i t ut ed a l oan under t he

pr e- BAPCPA ver si on of 523( a) ( 8) : Si nce t he par t i es st i pul at e

t hat t he [ c] ol l ege i s a nonpr of i t i nst i t ut i on and t hat t he credi t

was ext ended f or educat i onal pur poses . . . t he onl y i ssue

pr esent l y on appeal i s whet her t he [ c] ol l ege s extensi on of cr edi t

- 12-


13/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

was a l oan. I n r e J ohnson, 218 B. R. 450- 51. I n r e J ohnson

f ocused on a debt r epr esent ed by a pr omi ssory note, execut ed t o

evi dence t he debt or s obl i gat i on t o a col l ege t o pay f or t ui t i on,

books, and ot her expenses. I d. at 450. The debt or def aul t ed on

t he not e and f i l ed a chapt er 13 case. I d. The col l ege f i l ed an

adver sary pr oceedi ng i n t he debt or s bankrupt cy case aski ng t he

bankrupt cy cour t t o decl ar e t hat t he debt r epr esent ed by debt or s

not e was except ed f r om di schar ge. I d. The bankrupt cy cour t

concl uded t hat t he debt was a l oan f or pur poses of 523( a) ( 8) ,

and t he Ei ght h Ci r cui t BAP agr eed. I d. The panel r ej ect ed t he

debt or s ar gument t hat t he not e was not a l oan because no f undshad ever been gi ven t o hi m by the col l ege:

[ W] e concl ude[ ] t hat t he ar r angement between [ t hedebt or ] and t he [ c] ol l ege const i t ut es a l oan . . . .[ B] y al l owi ng [ t he debt or ] t o at t end cl asses wi t houtpr epayment , t he [ c] ol l ege was, i n ef f ect , advanci ngf unds . . . t o [ t he debt or ] . . . [ and i ] t i s i mmat er i alt hat no money act ual l y changed hands.

I d. at 457.

I t i s i mpor t ant t o not e t hat t he BAP i n I n r e J ohnson, as

r el i ed upon by t he Ni nt h Ci r cui t i n McKay, acknowl edged t hat

another avenue may have exi st ed f or t he col l ege t o obt ai n an

except i on to di schar ge under 523( a) ( 8) , char act er i zi ng t he not e

as an obl i gat i on t o r epay f unds r ecei ved as an educat i onal

benef i t ; however , t he panel determi ned i t need not vent ur e down

t hat pat h because the debt ar i si ng f r om t he agr eement wi t h t he

debt or was det ermi ned t o be an educat i onal benef i t l oan made by

a nonpr of i t or a gover nment al uni t . 6 218 B. R. at 450. By

6 Of cour se, t he col l ege/ cr edi t or i n I n r e J ohnson was anonpr of i t or gani zat i on. See I n r e J ohnson, 218 B. R. 450. ( st at i ngt he par t i es st i pul at e t hat t he [ c] ol l ege i s a nonpr of i ti nst i t ut i on). Si mi l ar l y, Vander bi l t Uni ver s i t y i s a nonpr of i ti nst i tut i on.

- 13-


14/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

cont r ast , i n I n r e Hawki ns, t he Panel was r equi r ed t o deci de

whet her t he agr eement bef or e i t cr eat ed an obl i gat i on t o r epay

f unds r ecei ved as an educat i onal benef i t because i t had concl uded

t he agr eement was not a l oan under t he st atut e. 317 B. R. at

112. I n addr essi ng t hi s i ssue, t he Panel st at ed t he pl ai n

l anguage of t hi s pr ong of t he st at ut e r equi r es t hat a debt or

r ecei ve act ual f unds i n or der t o obt ai n a nondi schar geabl e

benef i t . I d. ( ci t at i ons omi t t ed; emphasi s added) . The Panel

f ound t hi s r equi r ement was not sat i sf i ed because no act ual f unds

wer e r ecei ved by the debt or i n consi der at i on of her admi ssi on and

educat i on at t he medi cal school . I d.C. Enter BAPCPA.

As a resul t of t he Code amendment s i n BAPCPA, si nce 2005,

523( a) ( 8) has pr ovi ded t hat a debt or may not di schar ge a debt :

unl ess except i ng such debt f r om di schar geunder t hi s par agr aph woul d i mpose an unduehar dshi p on the debt or and the debt or sdependent s, f or

( A) ( i ) an educat i onal benef i t over payment orl oan made, i nsured, or guarant eed by agover nment al uni t or nonpr of i t i nst i t ut i on; or

( i i ) an obl i gat i on t o r epay f unds r ecei ved asan educat i onal benef i t , schol ar shi p, orst i pend; or

( B) any ot her educat i onal l oan t hat i s aqual i f i ed educat i on l oan, as def i ned i nsect i on 221( d) ( 1) of t he I nt er nal Revenue Codeof 1986, i ncur r ed by a debt or who i s ani ndi vi dual . 7

7 Under 523( a) ( 8) ( B) t o be a qual i f i ed educat i on l oanunder 26 U. S. C. 221( d) ( 1) , i t must , among ot her t hi ngs, be adebt f or a qual i f i ed hi gher educat i on expense, as def i ned by 26U. S. C. 221( d) ( 2) , whi ch i s t he cost s of at t endance . . . at anel i gi bl e educat i onal i nst i t ut i on. An el i gi bl e educat i onali nst i t ut i on i s one as def i ned by 26 U. S. C. 25A( f ) ( 2) , whi chpr ovi des an el i gi bl e educat i onal i nst i t ut i on means an

( cont i nued. . . )

- 14-


15/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

As can be seen, many of t he st at ut e s f or mer at t r i but es sur vi ved

BAPCPA s r evi si ons. On t he other hand, t here were some addi t i ons

t o i t s t ext , and t her e was al so a cl ear r est r uct ur i ng of t he

stat ut e.

Si nce enact ment of BAPCPA, nei t her t he Ni nt h Ci r cui t nor t hi s

Panel has publ i shed deci si ons i nt er pr et i ng 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) .

And onl y one publ i shed deci si on, ot her t han t he bankrupt cy cour t s

deci si on at i ssue i n t hi s appeal , was l ocat ed f r om bankrupt cy

cour t s i n t he Ni nt h Ci r cui t i nt er pr et i ng 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) .

Benson v. Cor bi n ( I n r e Cor bi n) , 506 B. R. 287 ( Bankr . W. D. Wa.

2014) .8

I n I n r e Cor bi n, t he bankrupt cy cour t expl ai ned t hat ,post - BAPCPA, t hi s Code pr ovi si on:

pr ot ect s f our cat egor i es of educat i onal cl ai msf r om di schar ge: ( 1) l oans made, i nsur ed, orguar ant eed by a gover nment al uni t ; ( 2) l oansmade under any pr ogr am par t i al l y or f ul l yf unded by a government al uni t or nonpr of i ti nst i t ut i on; ( 3) cl ai ms f or f unds r ecei ved asan educat i onal benef i t , schol ar shi p, orst i pend; and ( 4) any qual i f i ed educat i onall oan as t hat t er m i s def i ned i n t he I nt er nalRevenue Code.

506 B. R. at 291 ( ci t i ng Rumer v. Am. Educ. Ser vs. ( I n r e Rumer ) ,

469 B. R. 553 ( Bankr . M. D. Pa. 2012) ) . The bankr upt cy cour t

expl ai ned t hat 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) was added, cover i ng l oans made

7( . . . cont i nued)i nst i t ut i on - ( A) whi ch i s descr i bed i n sect i on 481 of t he Hi gherEducat i on Act of 1965 ( 20 U. S. C. 1088) . . . ( B) whi ch i s el i gi bl e

t o par t i ci pat e i n a pr ogr am under t i t l e I V of such Act . Anel i gi bl e pr ogr am i s f ur t her def i ned at 20 U. S. C. 1088( b) .

8 I n addi t i on, onl y one unpubl i shed deci si on i n t hi s ci r cui thas t ackl ed t hi s chor e. I n a case t hat i nvol ved Mer i di an, r el yi ngheavi l y upon the bankrupt cy cour t s deci si on her e, t he bankrupt cycour t decl i ned t o gr ant an except i on t o di schar ge. I nst . ofI magi nal Ser vs. v. Coel ho ( I n r e Coel ho) , No. 13- 10975, 2014 WL3858514 ( Bankr . N. D. Ca. Aug. 4, 2014) .

- 15-


16/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

by nongover nment al and pr of i t - maki ng or gani zat i ons . . . . I d.

at 296. Canvassi ng t he out - of - ci r cui t bankrupt cy cour t deci si ons,

t he cour t not ed t hat t hey pay no at t ent i on t o who t he l ender i s,

but f ocus i nst ead [ under 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) ] on whet her , i n t he

pl ai n l anguage of t he subsect i on, t he obl i gat i on i s t o r epay

f unds r ecei ved as an educat i onal benef i t as r ef l ect ed by the

debt or s agr eement and i nt ent t o use t he f unds at t he t i me the

obl i gat i on ar ose. I d. at 296- 97 ( ci t i ng Roy v. Sal l i e Mae ( I n r e

Roy) , 2010 WL 1523996 (Bankr . D. N. J . Apr . 15, 2010) ; Carow v.

Chase St udent Loan Ser v. ( I n r e Carow) , 2011 WL 802847 ( Bankr .

D. N. D. Mar . 2, 2011) ; Ski pwor t h v. Ci t i bank St udent Loan Cor p. ( I nr e Ski pwort h) , 2010 WL 1417964 ( Bankr . N. D. Al a. Apr . 1, 2010) ) .

Gi ven t he l ack of case l aw, t he bankrupt cy cour t set out t o

appl y post - BAPCPA 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) t o t he f act s bef or e i t . I n

r e Cor bi n i nvol ved cash advances f r om a t hi r d- par t y l ender t o t he

debt or t o at t end col l ege made, i n par t , because t he debt or s co-

wor ker had agr eed t o co- si gn t he l oan. 506 B. R. at 290. The

l ender l at er not i f i ed t he co- si gner t hat t he debt or was not payi ng

t he l oan. I d. The co- si gner pai d t he l oans and sued t he debt or

i n st at e cour t t o r ecover t he amount s he had pai d t he l ender . I d.

The debtor t hen f i l ed a bankr upt cy case, and t he co- si gner

commenced an adver sar y proceedi ng agai nst t he debt or argui ng t hat

t he debt owed by t he debt or t o t he co- si gner was except ed f r om

di schar ge under bot h 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i ) and ( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) . I d.

The bankr upt cy cour t decl i ned t o hol d t hat t hi s ar r angement

qual i f i ed f or an except i on f r om di schar ge under 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i )

based upon Ni nt h Ci r cui t aut hor i t y on subr ogat ed cl ai ms. I d. at

295- 96 ( ci t i ng Nat l Col l ect i on Agency v. Tr ahan, 624 F. 2d 906

- 16-


17/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

( 9t h Ci r . 1980) ) . However , t he bankrupt cy cour t concl uded t hat

t he debt was except ed f r om di schar ge under 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) ,

r easoni ng t hat because t he debt or

i nt ended t o and di d use t he f unds she r ecei vedt o pay f or educat i onal expenses . . . t hi s[ c] our t concl udes t hat t he pr ovi si ons of anaccommodat i on, i n or der t o secur e f or ast udent f unds f or t he pur pose of payi ngeducat i onal expenses, gi ves r i se t o anobl i gat i on on t he par t of t he debt or t o r epayf unds r ecei ved as an educat i onal benef i t oncet he co- si gner i s r equi r ed t o honor i t sobl i gat i on t o pay the debt .

I d. at 297- 98.

Of cour se, t he I n r e Cor bi n debt or act ual l y recei ved f undsf r om t he l ender t o pay f or her educat i on; t he f act s her e ar e

di f f erent .

D. Application of 523(a)(8)(A)(ii) to Meridians Debt

We agr ee wi t h t he bankr upt cy cour t t hat t he l anguage of

523( a) ( 8) i s pl ai n and t hat i t must be r ead i n cont ext wi t h a

vi ew t o t he over al l st at ut or y scheme. Mor eover , as i nst r uct ed by

t he Supr eme Cour t and Ni nt h Ci r cui t , we must const r ue 523( a)

nar r owl y, l i mi t i ng t hi s di schar ge except i on t o t hose debt s

descr i bed i n t he st at ut e. Bul l ock, 133 S. Ct . at 1760; Hawki ns,

769 F. 3d at 666; I n r e Huh, 506 B. R. at 263. Fi nal l y, we must

const r ue t he pr ovi si ons of 523( a) ( 8) t hat wer e f ound i n t he pr e-

BAPCPA ver si on of t hat st at ut e i n accor d wi t h t he Ni nt h Ci r cui t

aut hor i t i es i nt er pr et i ng t hem. Doi ng al l t hi s, we concl ude t hat

t he debt r epr esent ed by Mer i di an s ar bi t r at i on awar d agai nst

Debt or i s not except ed f r om di schar ge under 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) .

As a resul t , t he bankrupt cy cour t di d not er r i n gr ant i ng summar y

j udgment t o Debt or , and denyi ng Mer i di an s mot i on f or summar y

- 17-


18/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

j udgment .

Sect i on 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) pl ai nl y pr ovi des t hat a bankr upt cy

di schar ge wi l l not i mpact an obl i gat i on t o r epay f unds r ecei ved

as an educat i onal benef i t , schol ar shi p, or st i pend. I t i s

undi sput ed t hat t he agr eement s between Mer i di an and Debt or

const i t ut e an obl i gat i on t o r epay educat i onal benef i t s

pr ovi ded by Mer i di an t o Debt or . However , 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i )

r equi r es mor e. To except a debt f r om di schar ge under t hi s

subsect i on, t he cr edi t or must demonst r at e t hat t he debt or i s

obl i ged t o r epay a debt f or f unds r ecei ved f or t he educat i onal

benef i t s. The phr ase f unds recei ved has been i nt er pr et ed by t heBAP, i n an opi ni on whi ch was as adopt ed by the Ni nt h Ci r cui t as

i t s own, t o r equi r e t hat a debt or r ecei ve act ual f unds i n or der

t o obt ai n a nondi schar geabl e benef i t . I n r e Hawki ns, 317 B. R. at

112 ( emphasi s added) ; accor d I n r e Ol i ver , 499 B. R. 617, 625

( Bankr . S. D. I nd. 2013) ( hol di ng under 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) , [ i ] n

or der t o be obl i gat ed t o repay f unds r ecei ved, [ t he] [ d] ebt or had

t o have r ecei ved f unds i n t he f i r st pl ace. ) ( emphasi s i n

or i gi nal ) . Because t he I n r e Hawki ns deci si on const r ued t he ver y

same l anguage of t he st at ut e i mpl i cat ed her e, we concl ude that I n

r e Hawki ns cont r ol s t he out come i n t hi s case not wi t hst andi ng t hat

BAPCPA l at er amended 523( a) ( 8) . See Bal l v. Payco- General Am.

Cr edi t s, I nc. ( I n r e Bal l ) , 185 B. R. 595, 597 ( 9t h Ci r . BAP 1995)

( We wi l l not over r ul e our pr i or r ul i ngs unl ess a Ni nt h Ci r cui t

Cour t of Appeal s deci si on, Supr eme Cour t deci si on or subsequent

l egi sl at i on has under mi ned t hose r ul i ngs. ) . That t he ar r angement

bet ween t he par t i es i n I n r e Hawki ns was di ssi mi l ar t o t he

agr eement i n t hi s case i s of no consequence, and r enders t hat

- 18-


19/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

deci si on no l ess bi ndi ng, concer ni ng t he pr oper const r uct i on of

523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) . Thi s i s so because I n r e Hawki ns const r ued

t he very same st atut ory l anguage i mpl i cated here, and because t he

Panel and the Ci r cui t have concl uded t hat t hi s l anguage requi r es

t hat a debt or r ecei ve act ual f unds. I d. at 112.

Thi s r esul t i s bol st er ed by t he changes made t o 523(a) ( 8)

by Congr ess i n BAPCPA. As not ed above, t he exact wordi ng used i n

amended 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) was f or mer l y a par t of 523( a) ( 8) .

However , BAPCPA set of f t he obl i gat i on t o r epay f unds r ecei ved

l anguage f r om t he ot her pr ovi si ons of 523( a) ( 8) i n a new

subsect i on. We agr ee wi t h t he bankrupt cy cour t , t hat i nr est r uct ur i ng t he di schar ge except i on i n t hi s f ashi on, Congr ess

cr eat ed a separ at e cat egor y del i nked f r om t he phr ases

educat i onal benef i t or l oan i n 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i ) and any ot her

educat i onal l oan i n 523( a) ( 8) ( B) . I n r e Chr i st of f , 510 B. R.

at 882. Put anot her way, new 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) , now st andi ng

al one, except s f r om di schar ge onl y t hose debt s t hat ar i se f r om an

obl i gat i on t o r epay f unds r ecei ved as an educat i onal benef i t , and

must t heref ore be r ead as a separate except i on t o di schar ge as

compar ed t o t hat pr ovi ded i n 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i ) f or a debt f or an

educat i onal overpayment or l oan made by a government al uni t or

nonpr of i t i nst i t ut i on or , i n 523( a) ( 8) ( B) , f or a qual i f i ed

educat i on l oan.

Mer i di an s argument s conf l at i ng l oan as used i n

523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i ) and ( a) ( 8) ( B) , and as i nt er pr et ed by McKay and

I n r e J ohnson wi t h an obl i gat i on t o r epay f unds r ecei ved as

pr ovi ded i n 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) , ar e unconvi nci ng. Accor di ng t o

Mer i di an, [ t ] her e i s no r eason why t he wor d f unds shoul d not be

- 19-


20/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

i nt er pr et ed i n t he same l i ght t hat l oans has been i nt er pr et ed i n

pr i or cases i n t he Ni nt h Ci r cui t . . . . Appel l ant s Op. Br . at

14. I n ef f ect , Mer i di an ar gues t hat we shoul d r ead

523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) t o say l oans r ecei ved as opposed t o f unds

r ecei ved. But t hi s we must not do. See Conn. Nat l Bank v.

Ger mai n, 503 U. S. 249, 253- 54 ( 1992) ( [ I ] n i nt er pr et i ng a stat ut e

a cour t shoul d al ways t ur n f i r st t o one, car di nal canon bef or e al l

others. We have st ated t i me and agai n t hat cour t s must pr esume

t hat a l egi sl at ur e says i n a st at ut e what i t means and means i n a

st at ut e what i t says ther e. ) ( ci t at i ons omi t t ed) . I nst ead, we

must pr esume t hat , i n or gani zi ng t he pr ovi si ons of 523( a) ( 8) asi t di d i n BAPCPA, Congr ess i nt ended each subsect i on t o have a

di st i nct f unct i on and t o t ar get di f f er ent ki nds of debt s. 9

We ar e al so unpersuaded by Mer i di an s r el i ance on t hose

bankrupt cy cases that , per haps i nadver t ent l y, i mpr eci sel y quot e

t he pr ovi si ons of t he di schar ge except i on st at ut e as appl yi ng t o

l oans r ecei ved, as opposed t o t he obl i gat i on t o r epay f unds

r ecei ved deal t wi t h by 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) . See, e. g. , I n r e

Rumer , 469 B. R. at 561 ( st at i ng l oans r ecei ved as an educat i onal

benef i t , schol ar shi p, or st i pend ar e except ed f r om di schar ge) ;

9 On t hi s poi nt , we agr ee wi t h Debt or s counsel s st at ementat or al ar gument t hat 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) i s not a cat chal l pr ovi si on desi gned t o i ncl ude ever y t ype of cr edi t t r ansact i ont hat best ows an educat i onal benef i t on a debt or . I nst ead, t hi ssubsect i on i ncl udes a condi t i on, di st i nct f r om t hose i n t he ot her

subsect i ons of 523( a) ( 8) , t hat must be f ul f i l l ed. I n r e Hawki nshel d t hat t hi s uni que r equi r ement , t hat f unds [ be] r ecei ved byt he debt or , mandates t hat cash be advanced t o or on behal f of t hedebt or . I n l i ght of t he many pr ogr ams avai l abl e t o st udent s whi chpr ovi de cash benef i t s t o st udent s, l i ke vet er an s educat i onalbenef i t s, st i pends f or t eachi ng assi gnment s, and cashschol ar shi ps, i t i s not absur d t o assume t hat Congr ess i nt endedt he scope of 523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) t o t ar get obl i gat i ons ot her t hant hose ar i si ng f r om t r adi t i onal st udent l oans.

- 20-


21/21

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

see al so Beesl ey v. Royal Bank of Canada ( I n r e Beesl ey) , 2013 WL

5134404 (Bankr . W. D. Pa. Sept . 13, 2013) ( quot i ng Rumer and i t s

mi sst at ement of t he l aw) ; Li ber t y Bay Cr edi t Uni on v. Bel f or t e ( I n

r e Bel f or t e) , 2012 WL 4620987 ( Bankr . D. Mass. 2012) ( same) . I n

addi t i on, as observed by t he bankrupt cy cour t , t he ot her cases

r el i ed upon by Mer i di an ar e di st i ngui shabl e because t hey al l deal t

wi t h cases wher e t he debt or act ual l y r ecei ved f unds. See, e. g. ,

I n r e Cor bi n, 506 B. R. at 287; Br own v. Rust ( I n r e Rust ) , 2014 WL

1796154 (Bankr . E. D. Ky. May 6, 2014) ; Maas v. Nor t hst ar Educ.

Fi n. , I nc. ( I n r e Mass) , 497 B. R. 863 ( Bankr. W. D. Mi ch 2013) ; I n

r e Beesl ey, 2013 WL 5134404; I n r e Bel f or t e, 2012 WL 4620987; I nr e Car ow, 2011 WL 802847; Sensi ent Techs. Cor p. v. Bai occhi ( I n r e

Bai occhi ) , 389 B. R. 828 ( Bankr . E. D. Wi s. 2008) . Fi nal l y, whi l e

we have r evi ewed t he ot her deci si ons ci t ed by Mer i di an t hat ,

ar guabl y, r each a di f f er ent concl usi on t han we do her e, because

t he cour t s anal ysi s and r easoni ng i n t hose cases i s not f ul l y

devel oped, we f i nd t hemunpersuasi ve. See I n r e Roy, 2010 WL

1523996; The Rabbi Har r y H. Epst ei n School , I nc. v. Gol dst ei n ( I n

r e Gol dst ei n) , 2012 WL 7009707 ( Bankr . N. D. Ga. Nov. 25, 2012) .

Si mpl y put , because Debt or di d not act ual l y recei ve any

f unds, Mer i di an s debt i s not except ed f r om di schar ge under

523( a) ( 8) ( A) ( i i ) .

VI. CONCLUSION

The bankrupt cy cour t di d not er r i n grant i ng summar y j udgment

t o Debt or . We t her ef or e AFFI RM t he deci si on of t he bankrupt cy

cour t .

- 21-

in re: tarra nichole christoff, 9th cir. bap (2015)

Documents