Chelsea Conway v. National Collegiate Trust, No. 13-3104 (8th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Court Description: Civil case - Bankruptcy. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel decision reversing the bankruptcy court's determination that debtor had reasonably reliable future financial resources to pay her entire student loan debt is affirmed; the Panel did not err in remanding the matter to the bankruptcy court for a separate "undue hardship" discharge analysis on each of debtor's 15 individual debts. [ June 06, 2014

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 13-3104 ___________________________ In re: Chelsea Ann Conway lllllllllllllllllllllDebtor -----------------------------Chelsea Ann Conway lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. National Collegiate Trust lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant First Marblehead Corp., Inc. lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant ____________ Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit ____________ Submitted: June 4, 2014 Filed: June 9, 2014 [Unpublished] ____________ Before GRUENDER, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. National Collegiate Trust (NCT) appeals from the judgment of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP) reversing the Bankruptcy Court s determination that debtor Chelsea Conway had reasonably reliable future financial resources with which to pay her entire student loan debt to NTC. Reviewing the Bankruptcy Court s finding of facts for clear error and its conclusion of law de novo, the BAP determined that excepting from discharge all of Conway s obligations to NTC would impose an undue hardship under 11 U.S.C. ยง 523(a)(8). But the BAP remanded for a separate undue hardship discharge analysis of each of Conway s fifteen individual debts to NCT. We have independently reviewed the Bankruptcy Court s decision, applying the same standard of review as the BAP. See Walker v. Sallie Mae Servicing Corp. (In re Walker), 650 F.3d 1227, 1230 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard of review). We affirm for the reasons stated by the BAP. See Conway v. Nat l Collegiate Trust (In re Conway), 495 B.R. 416 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 2013). In addition, contrary to NCT s arguments on appeal, we find no abuse of discretion in the BAP s decision to reach the merits of the Bankruptcy Court s decision despite immaterial deficiencies in the record on appeal, see Wilson v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In re Wilson), 402 B.R. 66, 69 70 (B.A.P. 1st Cir. 2009), no contravention of congressional intent with regard to the discharge analysis, and no abuse of discretion in the decision to remand for further proceedings. Accordingly, we affirm. ______________________________ -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.