Section 523(a)(8) contains a
presumption that qualified student loans will not be discharged, and although
the presumption can be overcome by a debtor who shows "undue
hardship," bankruptcy courts often seek to have debtors take advantage of
federal programs to delay payment, rather than grant a discharge. However, when
a debtor is disabled, and there does not appear to be recovery within a
reasonable period, courts have favored discharge.
Section 523(a)(8) of the
Bankruptcy Code, as revised in 2005, states:
unless excepting such debt from discharge under this paragraph would impose an
undue hardship on the debtor and the debtor's dependents, for--(A)(i) an
educational benefit overpayment or loan made, insured, or guaranteed by a
governmental unit, or made under any program funded in whole or in part by a
governmental unit or nonprofit institution; or (ii) an obligation to repay
funds received as an educational benefit, scholarship, or stipend; or (B) any
other educational loan that is a qualified education loan, as defined in
section 221(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, incurred by a debtor
who is an individual.
The exception to discharge was enacted to save the student loan system and to
prevent undeserving debtors from obtaining a discharge of their college debts
shortly after graduation. The debtor's required burden is to show "undue
hardship" by the preponderance of the evidence. The burden is rigorous and
the hardship must be more than just financial adversity. Once the debtor has
made its burden, student loan debt will only be discharged if there is a
subsequent finding made by a bankruptcy court, prior to the court's discharge
of the debt.
Although Congress did not supply a definition of the phrase "undue
hardship," and courts generally have declined to give the phrase a precise
definition, one of two tests is employed to "examine each factual
situation and decide each case on its own merits."
The Brunner Test
Of the two tests currently in use to assist a court in making such a
determination, the most popular is the three-prong standard, first articulated
by the Second Circuit in Brunner v New York State Higher Educ. Serv. Corp. In
the Brunner decision, the Court held that for a debtor to successfully
obtain a discharge of the student loan(s) based upon "undue
hardship," that debtor must demonstrate that "(1) the debtor[s]
cannot maintain, based on current income and expenses, a 'minimal' standard of
living for [themselves and dependents] if forced to repay the loans; (2) that
additional circumstances exist indicating that this state of affairs is likely
to persist for a significant portion of the repayment period of the student
loans; and (3) that the debtor[s have] made good faith efforts to repay the
loans." This Brunner test, in one form or another, is currently
used by most of the circuits in the United States to determine whether or not a
debtor has demonstrated "undue hardship."
The Tenth Circuit has implemented a modified Brunner test, where a
bankruptcy court is required to apply the test "such that debtors who
truly cannot afford to repay their loans may have their loans discharged.
Additionally, the good faith portion of the Brunner test should consider
whether the debtor is acting in good faith in seeking the discharge, or whether
he is intentionally creating his hardship." [footnotes omitted]
Access the full version of "'Undue Hardship' Under Section
523(a)(8): Can the Debtor's Student Loans Be Discharged?" with your
lexis.com ID. Additional fees may be incurred.
If you do not have a lexis.com ID, you can purchase this commentary and additional Emerging Issues Commentaries from the LexisNexis Store.
Lexis.com subscribers can access the complete
set of Emerging Issues Analyses for Bankruptcy Law and the Bankruptcy Area of Law page.
For more information about LexisNexis
products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.