Beaupied

Beaupied v. Chang (In re Chang)

Good Law
163 F.3d 1138·98 Daily Journal DAR 13101·41 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 305·1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 32575·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9385
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 30, 1998No. 97-16760California1,569 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Trott, J.

George 0. Ting and Aleta Beaupied appeal a judgment of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”), reversing a bankruptcy court judgment in Ting and Beaupied’s favor. The BAP concluded that Chang’s debts to Ting and Beaupied arising from a child custody proceeding were not owed to a “spouse, former spouse, or child of the debtor, for alimony to, maintenance for, or support of such spouse or child,” 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a)(5) (1994 & Supp. IV 1998), and that Chang’s debts to Ting and Beaupied were therefore discharge-able and not entitled to priority. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d) (1994), and we reverse and remand.

I

Background

Ting and Chang, respectively the out-of-wedlock father and mother of minor child Lindsay Chang, were embroiled in a bitter custody dispute over Lindsay, in which Beau-pied was a court-appointed guardian ad litem to Lindsay. Chang accused Ting, falsely as it turned out, of sexually abusing Lindsay, requiring the expenditure of thousands of dollars in neutral experts’ fees and health professionals’ expenses to sort out the charges in court and for Lindsay’s mental well-being. Under the California Family Code, Ting and Chang became responsible in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.