Nielsen v. ACS, Inc., No. 13-6034 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseDebtor appealed the bankruptcy court's ruling denying her request for discharge of her student loan obligations to ECMC based on undue hardship pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(8). The bankruptcy appellate panel concluded that the bankruptcy court made detailed findings to support its decision that debtor's evidence was insufficient to substantiate a disability that would qualify as undue hardship. The bankruptcy court determined that the evidence regarding debtor and her family's alleged medical conditions concerning allergies related to mold and toxic mold exposure was insufficient to show that any of them suffered from a disability. Further, the bankruptcy court properly found and considered debtor's income limitations, future employment, and Income Contingent Repayment Plan as part of the totality-of-the-circumstances analysis. Accordingly, the panel affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. Bankruptcy court ruling denying debtor's request to discharge her student loans under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 523(a)(8) is affirmed as debtor failed to meet her burden of proving repayment would create an undue hardship; the bankruptcy court properly considered the availability of and the debtor's failure to enroll in an Income Contingent Repayment Plan in its totality-of-the-circumstances analysis and could reject debtor's position that she had not applied for repayment plans due to possible tax consequences.
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.