Boyle v. Donovan
| Decision Date | 09 January 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 83-1565,83-1565 |
| Parties | , Bankr. L. Rep. P 69,562 Ronald H. BOYLE, Appellant, v. Catherine C. Boyle DONOVAN, Ronald H. Boyle, II and Robert E. Boyle, Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Susan Gunter, Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Jackson & Tucker, Little Rock, Ark., for appellant.
Victor A. Fleming, Hoover, Jacobs & Storey, Little Rock, Ark., for appellees.
Before HENLEY, Senior Circuit Judge, and JOHN R. GIBSON and FAGG, Circuit Judges.
The issue presented in this appeal is whether the bankruptcy court 1 erred in characterizing a father's promise to pay for a son's college education as a nondischargeable support obligation rather than a dischargeable property settlement. Robert H. Boyle, debtor, made the promise at the time he and his ex-wife were divorced. We affirm.
On January 2, 1975, the debtor appellant, Ronald H. Boyle, and the appellee, Catherine Boyle Donovan, his ex-wife, entered into a property settlement agreement which was incorporated into their divorce decree. Paragraph five of the agreement provided:
Husband agrees to pay all the college and professional school education expenses of the said two minor children, which shall include, but not be limited to tuition, books, supplies, room and board, and a reasonable amount for spending money. This provision shall be limited to one post graduate professional degree for each child.
The debtor testified before the bankruptcy court that he suggested the inclusion of this paragraph, and that when the agreement was negotiated "there was just no disagreement" about who should pay for his sons' college expenses. (Tr. 9-10). The agreement also required that he pay child support of $750 per month for his two sons, and $1,250 per month in alimony.
At the time of the divorce the debtor was a practicing psychiatrist and had an annual gross income of approximately $100,000. (Tr. 19). His ex-wife was a student pursuing a graduate degree in social work.
In 1981 the debtor became delinquent in payment of his elder son's college expenses. His ex-wife brought suit in state court to enforce the property settlement agreement, and the court upheld the agreement and ordered the debtor to pay $2,300 in college expenses.
On June 14, 1982, the debtor filed a voluntary chapter 7 petition in the bankruptcy court. In his schedule the debtor listed his ex-wife as an unsecured creditor for the $2,300 in college expenses awarded by the state court. He then filed a complaint to determine the dischargeability of this debt. After conducting a hearing at which the debtor testified, the bankruptcy court held that the agreement to pay for college expenses "is in the nature of alimony, maintenance and support and is non-dischargeable." This appeal followed.
The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 prohibits the discharge of a debtor's alimony, maintenance or support obligations to his or her former spouse and children. Property settlements, on the other hand, can be discharged. 11 U.S.C. Sec. 523(a)(5). The debtor argues that the bankruptcy court erred in characterizing his agreement to pay for his sons' college expenses as a support obligation. Specifically, he contends that since under Arkansas law he had no legal obligation to pay for his sons' education, and since his sons are now adults with no present need of support, the bankruptcy court should have found the agreement to be a dischargeable property settlement.
This argument misses the point. In deciding whether to characterize an agreement as an alimony, maintenance or support obligation or a property settlement, the bankruptcy court does not examine the present situation of the parties. Rather, the crucial question is what function did the parties intend the agreement to serve...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Hart
...bankruptcy law, not state law." Id. at 1056. The case we have considered that is most similar to the present case is Boyle v. Donovan, 724 F.2d 681 (8th Cir.1984), which the court considered a debtor\'s obligation to pay educational expenses. The court rejected debtor\'s argument that since......
-
In re Jenkins
...support, alimony or maintenance are not dischargeable while property settlement obligations are dischargeable. E.g., Boyle v. Donovan, 724 F.2d 681, 683 (8th Cir. 1984); In re Grijalva, 72 B.R. 334 (S.D.W. Va.1987). That distinction arose from a trilogy of Supreme Court decisions issued at ......
- State v. Graves
-
In re Stone
...bankruptcy court to evaluate the state court\'s alimony award against the needs of the former spouse to whom it was granted. See Boyle, 724 F.2d at 683 (bankruptcy court should not "examine the present situation of the See Forsdick v. Turgeon, 812 F.2d at 803-804. As in the instant case, th......
-
Bankruptcy and Divorce: What Divorce Counsel Should Know About Bankruptcy - October 2008
...455 (Bankr.D.Id. 2008). 27. In re Harrell, 754 F.2d 902 (11th Cir. 1985); In re Poole, 383 B.R. 308 (D.S.C. 2007). 28. Boyle v. Donovan, 724 F.2d 681 (8th Cir. 1984). 29. Williams v. Williams (In re Williams), 703 F.2d 1055 (8th Cir. 1983). 30. Poole, supra note 27 at 314, citing In re Fitz......