Source: http://kirschenbaumesq.com/article/in-re-keith-bub-a-k-a-keith-l-bub-debtor-case-no-11-78278-reg-chapter-7-united-states-bankruptcy-court-for-the-eastern-district-of-new-york
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 23:02:46+00:00

Document:
City, NY; Steven B Sheinwald, Kirschenbaum & Kirschenbaum, Garden City, NY.
JUDGES: Hon. Robert E. Grossman, U.S.B.J.
is not payable directly to her does not change the outcome.
Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 ("BAPCPA").
pursuant to Bankruptcy Code section 507(a)(1)(A).
nature of alimony, maintenance, or support, expressly directs that the "nature"
priority treatment under section 507(a)(1)(A).
is not making a determination as to the amount of the Claim at this time.
This Court has jurisdiction over this core proceeding under 28 U.S.C.
conclusions of law to the extent required by Bankruptcy Rule 7052.
filed a reply, and the matter was marked submitted.
Residence was placed in the name of David Metal and Alisa.
also used to help the Debtor in his business.
to the Settlement Agreement, Alisa is a co-obligor on the note for the SBA loan.
David Metal Mortgage. Each paid for his or her own vehicle and individual bills.
The Debtor and Alisa have no children together.
In 2005, after eleven years of marriage, Alisa filed a petition for divorce.
her living expenses so as to allow her to remain in the Marital Residence.
non-instituting spouse to incur such liability."
paying for his collector vehicles, and completing home improvements.
than thirty-six (36) months from the date of this agreement.
obligations, Alisa would be able to stay in the Marital Residence.
the marriage, had recently been placed in a trust by the Debtor.
satisfied the SBA loan and the CitiMortgage Loan.
her with discretionary monthly income of $142.66.
individually has been stayed as a result of the Debtor's bankruptcy filing.
foreclosure action against the Cape Coral Property.
Claim as there is no documentation supporting these additional amounts.
of alimony, maintenance, or support.
"Domestic Support Obligation" Exception to Discharge, 28 Emory Bankr. Dev. J.
priority of payment than any other priority obligations under the Code.
non-dischargeable in a chapter 7 case.
given a separate and higher priority of payment than property settlements.
common meaning." Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd., 507 U.S.
380, 388, 113 S. Ct. 1489, 123 L. Ed. 2d 74 (1993).
] property settlement agreement[, or] an order of a court of record,"
6117, 2012 WL 8134423, at *13 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. Aug. 30, 2012).
agreed to pay the SBA loan and to indemnify Alisa with respect to the SBA loan.
v. Carlson (In re Dvorak), 986 F.2d 940, 941 (5th Cir. 1993); Gianakis v.
of payee requirement. See Pauley v. Spong (In re Spong), 661 F.2d 6, 7 (2d Cir.
n. 3 (10th Cir. 1995).
relative. BAPCPA also now provides that a DSO may be "owed to or recoverable by"
the payees named in the statute. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) (2006) (italics added).
on who could assert a DSO. See Tucker v. Oliver, 423 B.R. 378, 379-81 (W.D.
manner as it did in In re Spong. In re Rogowski, 462 B.R. 435, 444 (Bankr.
Adversary No. 09--2056, 2012 Bankr. LEXIS 1059, 2012 WL 837339, at *3 (Bankr. D.
not based on pre-BAPCPA case law, but on the language added by BAPCPA.
Pre-BAPCPA case law has echoed this sentiment in domestic relations matters.
.; see In re Yeates, 807 F.2d 874, 878 (10th Cir. 1986); see also Tilley v.
523(a)(5)."). See generally In re Davidson, 947 F.2d 1294, 1296-97 (5th Cir.
1991); Gianakas v. Gianakas (In re Gianakas), 917 F.2d 759, 762 (3d Cir. 1990).
Williams v. Williams (In re Williams), 703 F.2d 1055, 1057-58 (8th Cir. 1983).
case to reach a determination.
he has since satisfied this obligation.
found to be a property settlement or a DSO).
Hon. Robert E. Grossman, U.S.B.J.

References: v. 

v. 
 v.

 v. 
 § 523
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v.