You say:Whether or not a debt falls within the nondischargeable scope of Section 523(a)(5), or the dischargeable scope of Section 523(a)(15), depends upon whether the debt is considered "in the nature of support."
I reply: The court has "found" the debt to NOT be a DSO under 523(a)(5)..
That aspect is therefore moot.
A: Mootness means an issue which is no longer of any legal significance. If the court found the debt to not be a domestic support obligation, then that is very significant, because it means that the debt is absolutely dischargeable in Chapter 13.
You say further: "Your facts suggest a secondary issue, i.e, that the debt was not scheduled. That is a big problem in a Chapter 13, because per Bankr. Code § 523(a)(3)(A) & (B), an unscheduled debt is not dischargeable -- except in a "no asset" Chapter 7 case, because there is no time limit on filing proofs of claim, if the bankruptcy trustee determines there are no assets to distribute. In re Nielsen (9th Cir. 2004) 383 F.3d 922, at 927."
I reply: If you mean listed in the debtor's Plan, it was (is) so -listed and at less that 10% of the obligation. And, as stated in the caption of my question, the matter is a Chapter 13 matter.There is asset (disposable monthly income) after regular unsecured debts at pad per Plan (Credit cards). There is no, or negligible secured debt. This aspect also appears to be moot.
A: If the debt was listed, and found to not be a domestic support obligation, then it is discharged upon the full compliance of the Chapter 13 plan as confirmed.
Are we not back to the original question:? I. e., " In Chapter 13: , without claim of hardship by the debtor, any debt uncured by the debtor in their divorce decree is not dischargeable. This is to say that such obligation by the debtor to pay the debtor's former spouse remains after bankruptcy including an unsecured obligation to pay an asset equalizing debt ordered within the divorce decree; and that the debtor's Plan must include provision for significant payment of such obligation including arrears; and if not, and the Plan is Confirmed without this provision, it must and can be appealed, i.e. there is a remedy." ?
A: Hardship is irrelevant to the issue of dischargeability. The creditor has the burden of proof on whether or not a domestic support obligation is nondischargeable. Tilley v. Jessee (4th Cir. 1986) 789 F.2d 1074, 1077.
Therefore, based upon the above-discussed issues, the debt is absolutely dischargeable upon full compliance with the Chapter 13 plan.
The court finding that the debt was not a domestic support obligation could be appealed to the bankruptcy appellate panel or district court, within 14 days of the entry of the bankruptcy court order. If the finding did not discuss the "nature of support" issue, then that may provide an avenue to obtain a reversal on the grounds of misapplication of facts and law. But, in my view, that is the only means of undoing the current dischargeable status of the debt -- i.e., the only possible "remedy."
Hope this helps.