  10    1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  that are non-dischargeable.Adam v. Dobin(In re Adam), No. ADV 12-01295-DS, 2015 WL  1530086, at *5 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. Apr. 6, 2015),aff’d,677 F. App’x 353 (9th Cir. 2017); 4 COLLIER  ON  BANKRUPTCY¶ 523.23 (16th ed. 2018) (citing Pub. L. No. 103-394, § 304 (1994)).  BAPCPA broadened the marital debt exceptions to discharge even further by amending  § 523(a)(15) to remove the financial capacity and balancing of the detriments components that  were part of the original statute, and by amending § 523(c)(1) so that debts falling within the  scope of § 523(a)(15) are no longer automatically discharged if a party does not request a  determination from the bankruptcy court.In re Adam, 2015 WL 1530086, at *5-6. “The evolution  of § 523(a)(15) demonstrates Congress’s intent to spread as large a net, and to include as many  marriage dissolution-related claims as possible, within this exception to discharge.”Id.at *4;see  also Francis v. Wallace(In re Francis), 505 B.R. 914, 919 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2014) (noting that  circuit courts of appeals, particularly the Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits, have  recognized the wide breadth of § 523(a)(15)).  Although a goal of bankruptcy is to provide debtors with a fresh start, and although  exceptions to discharge must generally “be strictly construed against the objecting creditor and  liberally in favor of the debtor[,]” courts have recognized “an overriding public policy favoring  the enforcement of familial obligations.”Kawaauhau v. Geiger, 523 U.S. 57, 62, 118 S. Ct. 974,  977, 140 L. Ed. 2d 90 (1998);Mele v. Mele(In re Mele), 501 B.R. 357, 363 (B.A.P. 9th Cir.  2013) (quoting4 COLLIER ON BANKRUPTCY ¶ 523.05 (Alan N. Resnick & Henry J. Sommer eds.,  16th ed. 2013));McFadden v. Putnam(In re Putnam), No. 10-19719-A-7, 2012 WL 8134423, at  *5 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. Aug. 30, 2012) (quotingShaver, 736 F.2d at 1316).  In essence, a debt is non-dischargeable pursuant to § 523(a)(15) if: “(1) . . . the debt in  question is owed to a former spouse of the debtor; (2) . . . the debt is not a support obligation  within the meaning of § 523(a)(5); and (3) . . . the debt was incurred in the course of a divorce or  separation or in connection with a separation agreement, divorce decree, or other order of a court  of record.”Adam, 2015 WL 1530086, at *6.  As in the § 523(a)(5) context, caselaw has expanded the scope of § 523(a)(15) to cover  certain debts payable to non-designated payees.In re Francis, 505 B.R. 914, 919-20 (B.A.P. 9th  Case 4:18-ap-00495-BMW Doc 30 Filed 11/13/19 Entered 11/13/19 16:47:02 Desc  Main Document Page 10 of 11

Document 30