Piccinino v. U.S. Department of Education, No. 17-6022 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseThe Bankruptcy Appellate Panel affirmed the bankruptcy court's determination that debtor failed to meet her burden of proof to establish an undue hardship pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(8) to discharge her student loans. The panel held that the bankruptcy court did not err in dividing her federal tax refund by each month in the year and including it as monthly income; based upon the evidence of her age, health, skill sets and abilities, debtor failed to meet her burden to demonstrate that her future employment opportunities will not result in higher wages and full time employment; and the bankruptcy court's finding that debtor had sufficient income in excess of her expenses to make modest monthly payments to her lenders was amply supported by the evidence.
Court Description: Shodeen, Author, with Saladino, Chief Judge, and Dow, Bankruptcy Judge] Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. The bankruptcy court did not err in determining debtor failed to meet her burden of proof to establish an undue hardship under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 523(a)(8) to discharge her student loans; the bankruptcy court did not err in dividing her federal tax refund by twelve and including it as part of her monthly income; based on the evidence of her age, health, skills and abilities, debtor failed to demonstrate that her future employment opportunities will not result in higher wages; the court did not err in determining debtor's monthly expenses or in finding that she had income in excess of her expenses and could make modest monthly repayments. [ December 06, 2017
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.