Because the language of 11 U.S.C. § 101(14A) defining domestic support obligation tracks the language of former 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) and encompasses debts under that former statute, the court concludes that case law interpreting prior Section 523(a)(5) is relevant and applicable in construing new Section 101(14A). In re Nelson, 451 B.R. 918, 924 (Bankr. D. Or. 2011); 2 Resnick & Sommer, Collier on Bankruptcy, ¶ 101.14A at 101-93 - 101-95; 4 Resnick & Sommer, Collier on Bankruptcy, ¶ 523.11 at 523-78 - 523-80; Friedkin v. Sternberg (In re Sternberg), 85 F.3d 1400 (9th Cir. 1996), overruled on other grounds, In re Bammer, 131 F.3d 788, 792 (9th Cir. 1997); Shaver v. Shaver, 736 F.2d 1314 (9th Cir. 1984). Courts must look to the substance, not the form, of the obligation.
Because the language of 11 U.S.C. § 101(14A) defining domestic support obligation tracks the language of former 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) and encompasses debts under that former statute, the court concludes that case law interpreting prior Section 523(a)(5) is relevant and applicable in construing new Section 101(14A). In re Nelson, 451 B.R. 918, 924 (Bankr. D. Or. 2011); 2 Resnick & Sommer, Collier on Bankruptcy, ¶ 101.14A at 101-93 - 101-95; 4 Resnick & Sommer, Collier on Bankruptcy, ¶ 523.11 at 523-78 - 523-80; Friedkin v. Sternberg (In re Sternberg), 85 F.3d 1400 (9th Cir. 1996), overruled on other grounds,In re Bammer, 131 F.3d 788, 792 (9th Cir. 1997); Shaver v. Shaver, 736 F.2d 1314 (9th Cir. 1984). Courts must look to the substance, not the form, of the obligation.
Another nondischargeability provision involving divorce, Section 523(a)(15), is inapplicable because it was enacted after the Petition Date. See In re Sternberg, 85 F.3d 1400, 1403 n. 1 (9th Cir. 1996) (noting that Section 523(a)(15) is applicable to bankruptcy cases filed on or after October 22, 1994), overruled on other issues by In re Bammer, 131 F.3d 788, 792 (9th Cir. 1997). II. ISSUE
This question is a factual determination made by the bankruptcy court as a matter of federal bankruptcy law. In re Sternberg, 85 F.3d 1400, 1405 (9th Cir. 1996), rev'd on other grounds, In re Bammer, 131 F.3d 788 (9th Cir. 1997) (en banc).
Whether any particular financial obligation qualifies as "support," is determined by resort to federal law, and interpretations of "domestic support obligation" under former § 523(a)(5) are instructive. Friedkin v. Sternberg (In re Sternberg), 85 F.3d 1400, 1405 (9th Cir. 1996), rev'd on other grounds, Murray v. Bammer (In re Bammer), 131 F.3d 788 (9th Cir. 1997)); In re Nelson, 451 B.R. 918, 921 (Bankr. D. Or. 2011) (citing Beaupied v. Chang (In re Chang), 163 F.3d 1138, 1142 (9th Cir. 1998). Section 101(14A) provides:
Whether an obligation is in the nature of support and thus qualifies as support under bankruptcy law is a question of federal law. Friedkin v. Sternberg (In re Sternberg), 85 F.3d 1400, 1405 (9th Cir. 1996), overruled on other grounds, Murray v. Bammer (In re Bammer), 131 F.3d 788 (9th Cir. 1997). In determining whether an obligation is a DSO, the court looks to the interpretation of DSO discussed in cases relating to the dischargeability of support under former § 523(a)(5).
Whether an obligation is in the nature of support and thus qualifies as support under bankruptcy law is a question of federal law. In re Sternberg, 85 F.3d 1400, 1405 (9th Cir. 1996),rev'd on other grounds, In re Bammer, 131 F.3d 788 (9th Cir. 1997). In determining whether an obligation is a DSO entitled to priority under § 507(a), the court looks to the interpretation of support discussed in cases relating to the dischargeability of support under former § 523(a)(5).
Whether an obligation is in the nature of support and thus qualifies as a support under bankruptcy law is a question of federal law. In re Sternberg, 85 F.3d 1400, 1405 (9th Cir. 1996),rev'd on other grounds, In re Bammer, 131 F.3d 788 (9th Cir. 1997). In determining whether an obligation is a DSO entitled to priority under § 507(a), the court looks to the interpretation of DSO discussed in cases relating to the dischargeability of support under former § 523(a)(5).
Whether an obligation is in the nature of support and thus qualifies as a support under bankruptcy law is a question of federal law. In re Sternberg, 85 F.3d 1400, 1405 (9th Cir.1996), rev'd on other grounds, In re Bammer, 131 F.3d 788 (9th Cir.1997). In determining whether an obligation is a DSO entitled to priority under § 507(a), the court looks to the interpretation of DSO discussed in cases relating to the dischargeability of support under former § 523(a)(5).
, 4 Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 523.11[6] at 523-82 (15th ed. revised 1997); In re Sternberg, 85 F.3d 1400, 1405 (9th Cir. 1996), overruled on different grounds In re Bammer, 131 F.3d 788 (9th Cir. 1997); Davidson v. Davidson (Matter of Davidson), 947 F.2d 1294 (5th Cir. 1991); Matter of Benich, 811 F.2d 943, 946 (5th Cir. 1987). "`The circumstances of the parties subsequent to the entry of the judgment for divorce is irrelevant to that inquiry.'"