The NACTT Academy offers a comprehensive community for bankruptcy professionals seeking to advance their education in consumer bankruptcy.
ConsiderChapter13.org offers a forum to advance continuing education of consumer bankruptcy via access to insightful articles, informative webinars, and the latest industry news. Join now to benefit from expert resources and stay informed.
These informative sessions are led by industry experts and cover a range of consumer bankruptcy topics.
Written by industry experts, these articles provide in-depth analysis and practical guidance on consumer bankruptcy topics.
The Academy is the go-to source for the latest news and analysis in the Chapter 13 bankruptcy industry.
From the Editor – Discharge
Print This Article
Link to Post:
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired)
Ineligibility for loan restructure supported § 523(a)(8) undue hardship. The Chapter 13 debtor had cosigned student loans for former spouse, and the facts that the debtor was not the borrower and that the loans were not government-issued prevented the debtor’s eligibility to restructure the loans under the extended loan repayment provisions of 34 C.F.R. § 685.208. Therefore, the Brunner test was satisfied for undue hardship purposes. The Education Resources Institute, Inc. v. Zumbro (In re Zumbro), ___ Fed.Appx. ____, 2013 WL . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below:
Related Articles
IRS Warns of Impersonation Email Scam; Reminds Taxpayers IRS Does Not Send Unsolicited Emails
The Effect of “Success” (or the Lack of It) on Attorneys’ Fees Part 2: In re Village Apothecary, Inc.
Social Media Scams: Con Artists Target the Vulnerable
The “Snapshot” Rule – Part 2: When is the Rule Not Determinative?
New Trustee Named
The Gambling Debtor – What is a Chapter 13 Trustee to Do?
From the Editor – Lien Issues
Pump the Brakes: Bad Faith Debtors Are Not Gaming the System (Part II)
I Win. I Win. Trustee Holds Record for Having the Oldest Open Chapter 13 Case
Critical Case Comment – Sec. 328 vs. Sec. 327 Not Exactly a Smack Down