502 F. App'x 436
6th Cir.2012Background
- Two unmarried parents, Rugiero and DiNardo, resolved a child-custody dispute in Michigan; the state court awarded DiNardo $100,000 in attorney’s fees in two orders (May and November 2010).
- Rugiero filed for bankruptcy (Chapter 13, then converted to Chapter 7) in the Eastern District of Michigan shortly after the second fee award.
- DiNardo sought to treat the fee awards as domestic support obligations and argued they were non-dischargeable; Rugiero sought to enforce the automatic stay.
- The state court denied a stay pending appeal; it held the awards were non-dischargeable and subject to the stay’s exception for domestic support obligations.
- The bankruptcy court and district court agreed the fee awards were domestic support obligations, thus the automatic stay did not apply and the debts were non-dischargeable; Rugiero appealed.
- The Sixth Circuit affirmed, holding the fee awards were domestic support obligations and non-dischargeable, and that Rooker-Feldman did not deprive federal courts of jurisdiction to decide dischargeability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are the attorney’s fee awards domestic support obligations? | DiNardo argues the awards are child-related support under §101(14A). | Rugiero contends they are not, or that the awards are not rooted in support. | Yes; the awards are domestic support obligations. |
| Does the automatic stay apply to the state-court proceedings under §362(a) given the domestic-support exception? | The exception for domestic support obligations removes the stay’s applicability. | The automatic stay otherwise would apply to proceedings related to the bankruptcy estate. | The stay does not apply due to the domestic-support exception. |
| Are the debts resulting from the fee awards non-dischargeable under §523(a)(5)? | If treated as domestic support, the debts are non-dischargeable. | Dischargeability should be ruled only by applicable standards; Rooker-Feldman limits may apply. | Yes; the debts are non-dischargeable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Eden v. Robert A. Chapski, Ltd., 405 F.3d 582 (7th Cir. 2005) (fee awards treated as support in many contexts)
- In re Lowther, 321 F.3d 946 (10th Cir. 2002) (fee awards as domestic support where appropriate)
- In re Maddigan, 312 F.3d 589 (2nd Cir. 2002) (attorney’s fees can be in the nature of support)
- Sorah v. Sorah, 163 F.3d 397 (6th Cir. 1998) (state-law indicia of support used to classify obligations)
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Indus. Corp., 544 U.S. 280 (U.S.) (Rooker-Feldman doctrine governs collateral attack on state-court judgments)
- Hunter v. Hamilton Cnty. Bd. of Elections, 635 F.3d 219 (6th Cir. 2011) (Rooker-Feldman applicability in concurrent-jurisdiction contexts)