2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 3-8-2005 

# In Re: D a vid D ickson P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 03-3709

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a nova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " In Re: D a vid Dick s on " (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1468. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/1468NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 03- 3709 IN R E : D A V ID C . D IC K S O N , III , D ebt or D A V ID C . D IC K S O N , III ,

v. ELI ZAB ETH J . TI ND ALL D av id C . D icks o n , III , A ppel l ant

ON APPEAL FROM THE U NI TED STATES DI STRI CT CO UR T F O R T H E M ID D L E D IS T R IC T O F P E N N S Y L V A N IA

( D i s t . C our tN o. 4: 03- C V - 731) D istri ct C o u rtJu d g e: H o n . Jo h n E . Jo n es, II I Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

J anuary19, 2005 B efore: A L ITO , M C K E E , and S M ITH , C i rcui tJudg es.

( O pi ni on Fi l ed: M ar ch 8, 2005)2 OPI NI ON O F THE COURT P E R C U R I A M: A s w e w ri te o n ly f

o r t h e p a rt ie s in v o lv e d , w e w ill n o t r e s ta te th e e v id e n c e b e lo w . W e fi nd t he A ppel l antD avi d D i cks on’ s ar gum ent s t o be w i t houtm er i tand af fi r m t he D istri ct C o u rt ’s ord er. D avi d D i cks on fi l ed forC hapt er11 bankrupt cyi n t he M i ddl e D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a, s eeki ng t o di s char ge an obl i gat i on t o m ake mont hl ypaym ent s t o hi s for m er w ife, E li za b eth T ind all , in the am o u n t of $ 1 , 9 0 0 . 0 0 . T h e B an k rup tcyC o u rt , h o w ev er, h e l d t h a tt h e p a yme n t s we r e a l i mo n ya n d t h e r e f o r e n o n - d i s c h a r g e a b l e u n d e r1 1 U. S . C. §523( a) ( 5) ( B ) , and the D i s t r i ctC our taff i r m ed. I n t hi s appea l , D i cks on ar gues t hatt he paym ent s w er e noti n t he natur e of a l i m ony . T hi s i nqui r ytur ns on t he part i es ’ i nt entat th e tim e o f

th e a g re e m e n t, a n d w e re v ie w th e B a n k ru p tc yC o u rt ’s f in d in g f o r c le a r e rr o r. In R e: G iana k as, 91 7 F . 2 d 7 5 9 , 7 6 1 -62 (3d C ir . 1 9 9 0 ). B efor e pr ocee di ng t o hi s s ubs t ant i ve ar gum ent , D i cks on cont ends t hatt he D i s t r i ct C o u rtco m m itted leg al error b yn o t disco u n ti n g B an k rup tcyC o u rtJu d g e T h o m as’s fi ndi ngs of fa cton t he gr ounds t hatJ udge Thom as deci ded the ca s e bas ed on a tr ans cr i pt o f a h e a ri n g c o n d u c te d b yJ u d g e W o o d s id e , w h o p a s s e d a w a yb e f o re d e c id in g th e c a s e . H ow ever, D i ckson w as gi ven t he o pp ortun i t yt o h ave the case r eheard b yJudg e T ho m as, b u t h e c o n se n ted to a d e c isio n o n th e re c o rd . F u rth e rm o re , Ju d g e T h o m a s’s d e c isio n d idM r . D i cks on’ s ar gum ent s bas ed on s et t l ementnegot i at i ons and others ur r oundi ng 1 ci r cumst ance s can notbe cons i der ed on appe al beca us e theyr el yon document s noti n t he r ecor d. See F ED . R. A PP . P . 1 0 (b)(2 ). 3 n o t re st o n a n yd e ter m in a tio n o f w itn e ss c re d ib ili ty . U n d e r th e se c irc u m sta n c e s, th e re is no bas i s forgi vi ng t he fi ndi ngs of the B ankrupt cyC our tl es s defe r ence m er el ybeca us e, bym utual cons entof the i nt er es t ed part i es , t he ca s e w as deci ded on the r ecor d. T h e q u e stio n o f

w h e th e r D ick so n ’s o b lig a tio n to m a k e m o n th lyp a ym e n ts to T in d a ll i s p ro p e rlyc h a ra c ter ize d a s a lim o n yd e p e n d s o n w h e th e r th e p a rties in ten d e d to arr ange f orT i ndal l ’ s s uppor tori nt ended a pr oper t ys et t l ementunr el at ed t o s uppor t . See I n R e: G i anaka s , 917 F. 2d at762. “Thati nt entcan be s tbe found byexami ni ng t hr ee pr i nci pal fac t or s ”: ( 1) t he l anguage and s ubs t ance of the agr eementi n t he cont extof s ur r oundi ng ci r cumst ance s , ( 2) t he part i es ’ fi nanci al ci r cumst ance s att he t i m e of the s et t l ement , and ( 3) t he func t i on s erved byt he obl i gat i on att he t i m e of the di vor ce. I d. H e re , the lan g u a g e c re a tin g th e d e b t ex p re ss lysta tes th a t th e p a ym e n ts to T in d a ll cons t i tut e al i m ony . D i cks on ar gues t hatt hi s l anguage w as us ed s ol el ybeca us e al i m ony paym ent s ar e t ax- deduct i bl e and thatbot h par t i es actual l yi nt ended f ort he paym ent s t o be a di vi s i on of m ar i t al pr oper t y . I n s uppor tof thi s ar gum ent , D i cks on ci t es t he w or di ng of t he cl aus e di vi di ng m ar i t al pr oper t y , w hi ch i ndi cat es t hatt hi s di vi s i on w as onl ya “pa r t i al s et t l ement . ” Fr om t hi s l anguage , D i cks on i nfer s t hatt he mont hl ypaym ent s l abel ed

“ a lim o n y ” c o n stitu ted th e re m a in in g e lem e n t o f th a t d iv isio n . A lth o u g h w e a p p re c iate 1 D icks o n ’s arg u m en t, w e c an n o t saythat the lan g u ag e in q u esti o n fo rec lose s the co n tr ary4

re a d in g a d o p ted b yth e B a n k ru p tcy C o u rt. T he part i es ’ fi nanci al ci r cumst ance s att he t i m e of s et t l ements uppor tt he fi ndi ng th a t th e p a ym e n ts w e re in ten d e d to a llo w T in d a ll t o su p p o rt h e rse lf. A t th e tim e , T in d a ll w a s u n e m p lo y e d a n d lac k e d a c o lleg e d e g re e w h e re a s D ick so n f u llye x p e c ted th a t h is pr ofi t abl e pr act i ce w oul d cont i nue t o pr ovi de hi m w i t h ampl e i ncome. A l t hough t he t ot al val ue of the s et t l ementi s gener ous gi ven thatt he mar r i age l as t ed onl ys i x y ear s and the coupl e di d nothave a nychi l dr en, t he B ankrupt cyC our tcons i der ed thes e fa ct s i n l i ghtof th e c o u p le’ s lif

e sty le d u rin g m a rria g e . T h e c o n c lu sio n th a t T in d a ll req u ire d th e m o n e yto m a i n t a i n t h a tl i f

e s t yl e w a s n o tc l e a r l y e r r o n e o u s g i v e n h e rl i m i t e d a b i l i t y t o e a r n m o n e y. L as t l y , t he func t i on s erved byt he paym ent s att he t i m e of the di vor ce s ugges t s t hat t he part i es i nt ended Ti ndal l t o us e the moneyt o s uppor ther s el f. D i cks on acknow l edges t hatt he amountof ea ch mont hl ypaym entcorr es ponded t o t he mort gage pa ym enton t he m ari t al ho m e. B oth the B ank rupt cyC ou rtand t he D i stri ctC ou rtfou nd t hat these p ay m en ts al low ed T ind all to p aythe m o rt g ag e a n d rem ain in the m arit al ho m e. D icks o n ’s a rg u m e n t th a t th e ter m s o f th e a g re e m e n t d id n o t re q u ire T in d a ll t o u se th e p a ym e n ts to p aythe m o rt g ag e d o es n o t r eq u ir e a fin d ing that the m o n eyw as n o t i n tend ed fo r T ind all ’s su p p o rt. Fort he above r eas ons , w e af fi r m t he fi ndi ng t hatt he paym ent s ar e i n t he natur e of al i m onyand ther efor e non- di s char geabl e.