In re Thomas, 511 B.R. 89

James Thomas (Debtor) and Jennifer Clark (Creditor/ex-wife) had two divorces (2003, 2007) and two children; Debtor relinquished title to the marital home and the parties negotiated mortgage and support responsibilities in consent decrees.
2003 decree: Creditor assumed both mortgages; Debtor agreed to elevated child support (deviation tied to Creditor paying mortgages).
2007 decree: Creditor received the house; parties split the second mortgage; Debtor quitclaimed his interest; child support amount decreased.
A judgment lien (Auto Now) attached to Debtor in 2005; Creditor later sold the house in 2008, paid off first and second mortgages, and paid $5,000 to release the judgment lien from sale proceeds.
2009 state-court order required Debtor to reimburse Creditor $7,500 (second mortgage interest) and $5,000 (judgment lien payment); Creditor filed a proof of claim in Debtor’s Chapter 13 for $12,500 as a domestic support obligation (DSO); Debtor objected.
Bankruptcy court applied the Calhoun factors and held both the second-mortgage reimbursement and the judgment-lien reimbursement were "in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support;" order overruling Debtor’s objection was affirmed on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Creditor)	Defendant's Argument (Thomas)	Held
Whether Debtor’s obligation to reimburse half the second mortgage is a DSO	The mortgage payments preserved a home for the children and were intended as support; state orders and prior 2003 deviation tie mortgage payments to children’s support	The second-mortgage allocation is a property settlement, not support; decrees did not label it spousal support	Held: DSO — court found intent to create support, payments provided necessary support, and findings not clearly erroneous
Whether Debtor’s reimbursement of Creditor’s payment of the $5,000 judgment-lien release is a DSO	Lien reduced sale proceeds intended as support; 2009 order required reimbursement in context of support proceedings, so debt is in nature of support	Lien was third-party debt not addressed in divorce decree and arose while married, so it is not support	Held: DSO — court treated lien reimbursement as support because it replaced lost proceeds that were meant to provide for the children

Long v. Calhoun (In re Calhoun), 715 F.2d 1103 (6th Cir. 1983) (four-part test for whether an obligation not labeled as support is nonetheless "in the nature of support")
Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald (In re Fitzgerald), 9 F.3d 517 (6th Cir. 1993) (modifies Calhoun framework; burden on non-debtor to prove nature of support)
Sorah v. Sorah (In re Sorah), 163 F.3d 397 (6th Cir. 1998) (discusses mixed question standard and allocation of review for DSO determinations)
Gianakas v. Gianakas (In re Gianakas), 917 F.2d 759 (3d Cir. 1990) (majority view that assumption of mortgage to preserve family residence is support)
Holliday v. Kline (In re Kline), 65 F.3d 749 (8th Cir. 1995) (third-party debts may be nondischargeable as support when they effectively serve support purposes)
Midland Asphalt Corp. v. United States, 489 U.S. 794 (U.S. 1989) (finality concept for appellate review)