TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Lincoln Park Community Credit Union v. Sinclair-Ganos (In re Sinclair-Ganos)

In Re Beverly SINCLAIR-GANOS, Debtor. LINCOLN PARK COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION, Plaintiff, v. Beverly SINCLAIR-GANOS, Defendant

Lincoln Park Cmty. Credit Union v. Sinclair-Ganos (In re Sinclair-Ganos), 133 B.R. 382 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. 1991)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · Bankruptcy Courts
Decided
October 6, 1991
Docket
No. 20-01321
Judges
Nims
Citations
133 B.R. 38225 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 15681991 Bankr. LEXIS 16291991 WL 238725

Opinion — Nims

*383 OPINION DAVID E. NIMS, Jr., Bankruptcy Judge.' Lincoln Park Community Credit Union (Credit Union) filed its complaint praying that this court determine that the educational loan made to Beverly Sinclair-Ga-nos (Debtor) is a nondischargeable debt under 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a)(8). This adversary proceeding was filed on April 26,1990, and the base case was filed on October 11, 1989.

At the trial, the court found that the total indebtedness on the student loans in question was $32,677.84, and that excepting the debt from discharge would not impose an undue hardship on the Debtor and her dependents. However, the court was disturbed because of the unique developments after the making of the loans to the Debtor. Debtor obtained her loans from the Credit Union from a period extending from October 26, 1982, through May 5, 1986, to finance her education at Eastern Michigan University from which she received a bachelor’s degree and at the University of Toledo Law School from which she received a J.D. degree. These loans were guaranteed by the Michigan Higher Education Assistance Authority (Michigan). Upon default the loans were duly assigned to Michigan but on March 29, 1989, a document titled “Assignment of a Student Promissory Note” assigned the loans “without warranty (except that the note qualified for insurance)” to the Credit Union. The only explanation given at the time of trial was by the attorney for the Credit Union. He explained that the Credit Union was relying on its past loan history with the Debtor and so certain steps necessary to collection of the guarantee were not taken, resulting in the Credit Union’s loss of rights under the warranty. The only witness who testified at the trial was the Debtor.

11 U.S.C. § 523 (a)(8) (Supp.1991)

1

provides:

(a) A discharge under section 727, ... does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt— (8) for an educational 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 a nonprofit institution, In the 1984 Amendment, Subsection (a)(8), Pub.L. No, 98-353, § 454(a)(2), struck out “of higher education” after “a nonprofit institution.”

Two issues arose in connection with this case. First, whether the assignment of the note by Michigan back to the Credit Union disqualifies the loan from being found nondischargeable pursuant to § 523(a)(8), and secondly, whether the Credit Union qualifies under this statute as a “nonprofit institution.”

The court did not find any published opinions which discussed whether the status of “guaranteed by a governmental unit” should be established at the time of issuing the loan or at the time of filing, and no legislative history was helpful in ascertaining what the drafters intended. However, the Honorable Laurence E. Howard of this court has held in a bench opinion on December 13,1989, in Talbert v. Bay Bank (In re Talbert), Case No. HM 89-00044, A.P. 89-0009 that where a student loan was not guaranteed at the time of the filing of the bankruptcy petition, the loan does not fall within the language of § 523(a)(8) and is thus dischargeable. In the case at bar, the Assignment was dated March 29, 1989, and the case was filed on October 11, 1989. Since as of the date of the filing of this case the loan was not guaranteed, the debt owed to Lincoln Park Community Credit Union is not excepted from discharge based on the argument that this is an educational loan guaranteed by a governmental unit. Therefore, the second issue of whether or not a credit union quali *384 fies as a nonprofit institution tinder § 523(a)(8) must be addressed.

Once again, no cases have been found which discuss, let alone support, the position that a credit union is a nonprofit institution for purposes of this subsection and no enlightening legislative history has been uncovered. Because a credit union is a lending institution which competes with banks, there is no apparent reason to give a credit union a more favorable position in proceedings determining the dischargeability of student loans. Thus, this court holds that a credit union is not a nonprofit institution under 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a)(8) and Beverly Sinclair-Ganos’ debt to the Lincoln Park Community Credit Union is discharged.

1

. In the 1990 Amendments (Pub.L. No. 101— 581), effective November 15, 1990, subsection (a)(8) was amended, apparently broadening its scope. However, since both the base case and the adversary proceeding were filed prior to the Amendments, the statute as then existing applies to this case.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

1993: 11994: 21995: 31997: 119932026peak 1995 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Construction Equipment Federal Credit Union v. Roberts (In re Roberts)149 B.R. 547 (C.D. Ill. 1993)
  2. Navy Federal Credit Union v. Simmons (In re Simmons)175 B.R. 624 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 1994)
  3. TI Federal Credit Union v. Delbonis (In re Delbonis)183 B.R. 1 (D. Mass. 1995)
  4. TI Federal Credit Union v. Delbonis (In re Delbonis)169 B.R. 1 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1994)
  5. T I Federal Credit Union v. DelBonis72 F.3d 921 (1st Cir. 1995)
  6. In re Trusko212 B.R. 819 (Bankr. D. Md. 1997)

Most recent

  1. In re Trusko212 B.R. 819 (Bankr. D. Md. 1997)
  2. T I Federal Credit Union v. DelBonis72 F.3d 921 (1st Cir. 1995)
  3. T I v. DelBonisNo. 95-1702 (1st Cir. Dec. 18, 1995)
  4. TI Federal Credit Union v. Delbonis (In re Delbonis)183 B.R. 1 (D. Mass. 1995)
  5. Navy Federal Credit Union v. Simmons (In re Simmons)175 B.R. 624 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 1994)
  6. TI Federal Credit Union v. Delbonis (In re Delbonis)169 B.R. 1 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1994)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list