Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): Kan. Stat. Ann. § 76-713. 4 . This decision, therefore, does not address or rule upon the applicability of the Ex parte Young exception to violations of 11 U.S.C. § 525, 11 U.S.C. § 362, or 11 U.S.C. § 524(a)(2); or violations of federal law or regulations not grounded in the Bankruptcy Code, e.g., 34 CFR 682.402(f)(2)(i) ("If the lender [of a loan governed by these regulations] is notified that a borrower has filed a petition for relief in bankruptcy, the lender must immediately suspend any collection efforts outside the bankruptcy proceeding against the borrower."). See, e.g., In re Carson, 150 B.R. 228, 231 (Bankr.E.D.Mo.1993) (discussing whether failure to release transcript violates automatic stay); Buford v. Higher Education Assistance Foundation, 85 B.R. 579, 582 (D.Kan.1988) (<HOLDING>); In the Matter of Heath, 3 B.R. 351 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that the debtor must pay the government interest at the rate the debtor would pay a commercial lender for a loan of equivalent amount and duration considering the risk of default and any security (B) holding that an answer that asserts a counterclaim against a plaintiff who then becomes a bankruptcy debtor is an action or proceeding against the debtor within the meaning of  362a1 notwithstanding the fact that the debtor initiated the lawsuit (C) holding that the bankruptcy court lacked the power under  105a to grant the partial discharge of student loan debt when the debtor did not show undue hardship as required by statute (D) holding that it was not improper for a lender to halt the proposed settlement and discounted payment of plaintiffs loan when the lender believed the loan would otherwise be paid in full (E) recognizing that a debtor may be able to obtain an injunction against a lender for attempting to collect a student loan after the filing of bankruptcy in violation of 34 cfr 682
Output (English): holding that it was not improper for a lender to halt the proposed settlement and discounted payment of plaintiffs loan when the lender believed the loan would otherwise be paid in full