Robinson v. Burcham

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION - 1
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
______________________________________________________
In Re:
Bankruptcy Case
RONALD R. BURCHAM and 	No. 04-04178
CHRISTINE K. MARTINEZ,
Debtors.
______________________________________________________
SUSANNE T. ROBINSON,
Plaintiff, 	Adv. Proceeding No. 05-6002
vs.
RONALD R. BURCHAM,
Defendant.
______________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
______________________________________________________
Appearances:
Susanne T. Robinson, Boise, Idaho, Pro Se Plaintiff.
Richard Alban, Nampa, Idaho, Attorney for Defendant.
Plaintiff Susanne Robinson asks the Court to determine that a debt
owed to her by her former spouse, Defendant Ronald Burcham, arising from their
Case 05-06002-JDP Doc 25 Filed 09/02/05 Entered 09/02/05 10:19:13 Desc Main
Document Page 1 of 9

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION - 2
divorce decree is excepted from discharge in Defendant’s Chapter 7 bankruptcy
case. The Court conducted a trial in this adversary proceeding on August 18,
2005, at which the parties presented evidence and testimony. The issues were
taken under advisement. This Memorandum constitutes the Court’s findings of
fact and conclusions of law. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7052.
Facts
The parties were divorced on May 15, 2003. Ex. 1. Defendant was
obligated to pay a debt owed to Capital One VISA in the amount of $5,989.65.
Compl. Docket No. 1. Defendant failed to pay this debt.
On March 15, 2004, a Stipulation, Order and Judgment was entered
in state court wherein Defendant was given “an additional thirty (30) days in
which to remove his name from the Capital One Visa/Ford Explorer account
and/or roll the balance over to another card or account.” Ex. 2. Neither occurred.
Defendant filed for bankruptcy relief under Chapter 7 on November 22, 2004. It
is unclear what payments, if any, Defendant has made to Capital One VISA.
Plaintiff works for the United States Department of Agriculture.
Plaintiff remarried and her spouse, Ronald Robinson, is employed by the Idaho
Department of Labor and Commerce. The Robinsons’ combined monthly net
income is $4,682.54, which figure includes $218.79 in child support Plaintiff
Case 05-06002-JDP Doc 25 Filed 09/02/05 Entered 09/02/05 10:19:13 Desc Main
Document Page 2 of 9

1 Defendant testified he is currently six months behind in paying child support.
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION - 3
receives from Defendant. 1 Ex. 8. Plaintiff calculates her monthly expenses at
$6,431.36. This leaves Plaintiff with a monthly deficit of $1,748.82. Ex. 8.
Defendant, who has also remarried, is currently unemployed. He
testified he prefers to be a stay-at-home father because he can not earn enough to
cover daycare expenses for his six-year-old twin step-daughters. His last job was
installing spray-in truck linings, but he was laid off due to a slow down in
business. Prior to that, Defendant worked ten years for an irrigation district. A
confrontation with a superintendent ended that employment. From 1986 to 1994,
Defendant served in the Army as a diesel engine mechanic.
Defendant testified he is currently searching for full-time work, but
would like to start his own lawn and sprinkler business. Defendant receives $108
a month in disability payments attributable to an ankle injury suffered in the
military. He may need surgery. On his Amended Schedule I, Ex. F, Defendant
stated he receives $1,000 a month from his lawn and sprinkler business, however,
through testimony Defendant indicated that the amount listed is what he hopes to
earn when he is able to work more once the twins are in school. Currently, his
only customer is his mother, who pays him $40 a month to maintain her lawn.
Defendant’s spouse, Christina Martinez, is a recreational therapist
Case 05-06002-JDP Doc 25 Filed 09/02/05 Entered 09/02/05 10:19:13 Desc Main
Document Page 3 of 9

2 This includes Ms. Martinez’s take home pay of $2,409.94, Defendant’s $108 in
disability and the $40 he earns mowing lawns. Because Defendant testified the $1,000 he
scheduled as his income is what he hopes to earn, the Court did not consider that amount.
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION - 4
with a masters degree. Her net monthly income is $2,409.94, including the
thirteen dollars a month in child support she receives from her ex-husband. Ex. F.
Ms. Martinez has custody of her twin daughters every other week. However, once
school begins the twins will live full-time with Defendant and Ms. Martinez. Ms.
Martinez testified there is no prospect for a modification of child support to reflect
this change in custody, but that her ex-husband has agreed to pay the twins’ out-
of-pocket medical expenses.
Defendant calculates his total monthly expenses at $3,866.50.
Defendant and his spouse have a combined monthly income of $2,557.94,2
leaving Defendant with a monthly deficit of $1,308.56.
Plaintiff contends Defendant’s current financial obligations are short
term and he will be able to pay the Capital One VISA bill. Plaintiff’s husband is
ill, meaning that Plaintiff will face an uncertain amount of future medical bills,
and uncertainty as to how this illness will impact the couple’s finances. Defendant
argues he does not have the ability to pay the VISA bill and that the benefit of a
discharge to him would outweigh the detriment it would cause Plaintiff.
Case 05-06002-JDP Doc 25 Filed 09/02/05 Entered 09/02/05 10:19:13 Desc Main
Document Page 4 of 9

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION - 5
Disposition
A. Applicable Law.
A debt arising from a divorce decree is not subject to discharge
unless:
(A) the debtor does not have the ability to pay such
debt from income or property of the debtor not
reasonably necessary to be expended for the
maintenance or support of the debtor or a dependent of
the debtor and, if the debtor is engaged in a business
for the payment of expenditures necessary for the
continuation, preservation, and operation of such
business; or
(B) discharging such debt would result in a benefit to
the debtor that outweighs the detrimental
consequences to a spouse, former spouse, or child of
the debtor.
11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(15).
“Plaintiff bears the burden of making a prima facie case for
application of the exception to her debt.” Edwards v. Edwards (In re Edwards),
96.3 I.B.C.R. 105, 106 (Bankr. D. Idaho 1996). The parties concede the debt
arises from the divorce and that § 523(a)(15) applies. As a result, the burden shifts
to Defendant to show he should receive a discharge pursuant to § 523(a)(15)(A)
or (B). Id. “However, Defendant need demonstrate he satisfies the conditions of
only one of these subsections, since the statute is clearly phrased in the
Case 05-06002-JDP Doc 25 Filed 09/02/05 Entered 09/02/05 10:19:13 Desc Main
Document Page 5 of 9

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION - 6
alternative.” Id. (citing 11 U.S.C. § 102(5)).
The Court applies “the same analysis under Section 523(a)(15) as
that used in Chapter 13 disposable income determinations.” Edwards, 96.3
I.B.C.R. at 107 (citing In re Jodoin, 196 B.R. 845, 854 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 1996); In
re Morris, 193 B.R. 949, 953 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1996)). 	“The Court considers
Defendant’s annual income, reasonably necessary expenses, and reasonably
projectable future events known at the time of trial.” Id. (citing Morris, 193 B.R.
at 953, n.6).
In simple terms, the “disposable income” test requires
the court to assess the debtor’s budgeted necessary
expenses to determine whether the debtor could afford
to pay the obligation. Any income remaining after
satisfying the debtor’s budgeted necessary expenses is
considered “disposable income” which can be applied
towards the debtor’s obligations.
Prestwich v. Prestwich (In re Prestwich), 01.3 I.B.C.R. 101, 102 (Bankr. D. Idaho
2001) (internal citations omitted).
B. Analysis.
Defendant’s monthly budget for expenses is $3,866.50. The
expenses consist of: a house payment of $795; electricity and heating of $175;
water and sewer of $35; telephone of $60; a cell phone for $144; home
maintenance of $100; food of $600; clothing of $150; laundry and dry cleaning of
Case 05-06002-JDP Doc 25 Filed 09/02/05 Entered 09/02/05 10:19:13 Desc Main
Document Page 6 of 9

3 Given Defendant’s work history there is no reason to doubt that he could make
at least $1,000 a month even if he were to obtain employment other than starting his own
business.
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION - 7
$30; medical and dental of $255; transportation, not including car payment, of
$300; recreation of $100; charitable contributions of $10; auto insurance of $80;
an auto payment of $247; a reaffirmed debt to Les Schwab of $75; a debt to Fred
Meyer Jewelers of $75; child support to Plaintiff of $210.50; and other expenses
of $425.
To the Court, in this context, several of Defendant’s expense items
are excessive or even unnecessary. The auto payment of $247 should not be
considered as Defendant testified the car was repossessed. Defendant’s payment
of $75.00 a month to Fred Meyer Jewelers is not a necessary monthly expense.
Finally, the Court finds $144 a month for a cell phone is an excessive amount
under these facts. Defendant’s attorney indicated this includes phones for both
Defendant and Ms. Martinez. Since Defendant is not working outside the home,
he should be expected to use the home phone. Defendant’s list of expenses will
therefore be reduced by $422.
However, even given the reduction, Defendant still has a monthly
income/expense deficit of $886.56. 	Even if the Court included as income the
$1,000 3 a month Defendant hopes to make with his lawn and sprinkler business,
Case 05-06002-JDP Doc 25 Filed 09/02/05 Entered 09/02/05 10:19:13 Desc Main
Document Page 7 of 9

4 This number ignores the probability that for Defendant to work he will likely
need another car so both he and Ms. Martinez can travel to and from work. Additionally,
the budget does not appear to include any business expenses. It is unlikely any surplus is
likely to exist, but the Court considers it based upon the income and expenses the parties
submitted.
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION - 8
this would place the family in the position of having a monthly disposable income
of $113.44. 4 While neither party showed the Court the current amount needed
for monthly payments on the Capital One VISA account, Plaintiff testified the
monthly payments used to be between $150 and $160. After reducing
Defendant’s monthly expenses and considering his target monthly income, it is
clear that Defendant does not have the funds necessary to pay the Capital One
VISA bill.
There are also other expenses which are not currently reflected in
Defendant’s budget, but which should be considered in this analysis. Defendant is
six months behind in child support payments that he will need to make current
because he testified that if he fails to address this problem, the State will suspend
his driver’s license. Additionally, Defendant testified his family now has only one
vehicle, a 1984 Jeep. Acquiring another vehicle would seem to be a necessity to
sustain the family.
Conclusion
As noted above, under § 523(a)(15) Defendant need only show he
Case 05-06002-JDP Doc 25 Filed 09/02/05 Entered 09/02/05 10:19:13 Desc Main
Document Page 8 of 9

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION - 9
satisfies the requirements of subsection (A) or (B) to discharge his obligation to
his former spouse. Defendant has shown for purposes of § 523(a)(15)(A) that he
does not have the ability to pay the debt. Defendant’s obligation to Plaintiff for
the Capital One VISA account is therefore discharged. A separate judgment will
be entered.
Dated: September 2, 2005
Honorable Jim D. Pappas
United States Bankruptcy Judge
Case 05-06002-JDP Doc 25 Filed 09/02/05 Entered 09/02/05 10:19:13 Desc Main
Document Page 9 of 9