Peters v. Hennenhoeffer

Second Circuit

Peters v. Hennenhoeffer

964 F.2d 166, 1992 WL 103445

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMay 18, 1992

DocketNo. 1345, Docket 92-5001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 964 F.2d 166 (Peters v. Hennenhoeffer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Peters v. Hennenhoeffer, 964 F.2d 166, 1992 WL 103445 (2d Cir. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Bernard J. Peters, pro se, appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Gerard L. Goettel, Judge, affirming a judgment of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, Howard Schwartzberg, Judge, which held that fees owed to attorney Hennenhoeffer for his representation of Peters’ son were in the nature of support and thus nondischargeable debts within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) (1988). Substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Goettel’s opinion, 133 B.R. 291 (S.D.N.Y.1991), including his reliance on In re Spong, 661 F.2d 6, 9 (2d Cir.1981) (“An award of attorney’s fees may be essential to a spouse’s ability to sue or defend a matrimonial action and thus a necessary under the law. ... [Djischargeability must be determined by the substance of the liability rather than its form.”), we affirm.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Bernard J. Peters, pro se, appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Gerard L. Goettel, Judge, affirming a judgment of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, Howard Schwartzberg, Judge, which held that fees owed to attorney Hennenhoeffer for his representation of Peters’ son were in the nature of support and thus nondischargeable debts within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) (1988). Substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Goettel’s opinion, 133 B.R. 291 (S.D.N.Y.1991), including his reliance on In re Spong, 661 F.2d 6, 9 (2d Cir.1981) (“An award of attorney’s fees may be essential to a spouse’s ability to sue or defend a matrimonial action and thus a necessary under the law. ... [Djischargeability must be determined by the substance of the liability rather than its form.”), we affirm.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

964 F.2d 166, 1992 WL 103445, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peters-v-hennenhoeffer-ca2-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack