Moore

Educational Credit Management Corp. v. Moore

Good Law
97 F. App'x 88
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 23, 2004No. 02-17519; D.C. No. CV-02-00297-SRBCalifornia480 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Educational Credit Management Corporation (“ECMC”) appeals from the district court’s judgment affirming the final judgment of the bankruptcy court, which partially discharged the student loan debt owed by Peggy J. Moore to ECMC. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d) and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We reverse in part and affirm in part.

We review de novo a district court’s decision on an appeal from a bankruptcy court. In re Saxman, 325 F.3d 1168, 1172 (9th Cir.2003). The bankruptcy court’s award of attorneys fees must be upheld unless the court abused its discretion or erroneously applied the law. In re Smith, 317 F.3d 918 , 923 (9th Cir.2002).

ECMC contends that the bankruptcy court erred in partially discharging Moore’s student loan pursuant its equitable powers under 11 U.S.C. § 105 (a), despite the fact that Moore did not satisfy the three-part “undue hardship” test articulated in In re Rifino, 245 F.3d 1083 , 1087 (9th Cir.2001). A student loan may be discharged only on a finding that repayment of the debt would cause an “undue hardship” upon the debtor. 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a)(8); see Rifino, 245 F.3d at 1087 (determining that a student debt imposes an…

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.