No. 20-1597
Kathryn MacEwen Conti v. Arrowood Indemnity Company
Response Waived
Tags: bankruptcy bankruptcy-discharge commercial-lending consumer-protection contract-law debt-classification non-dischargeable-debt promissory-notes student-loans
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2021-06-24
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether commercial lenders can create non-dischargeable debts by using language in promissory notes that identifies the loan as a 'student loan' or 'educational loan'
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED May commercial lenders create non-dischargeable debts by placing language in the promissory notes that identifies the loan as a “student loan,” “educational loan” or other such language mirroring this Court’s pronouncement in Hood and Espinosa that all student loans are non-dischargeable?
Docket Entries
2021-06-28
Petition DENIED.
2021-06-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/24/2021.
2021-05-20
Waiver of right of respondent Arrowood Indemnity Company to respond filed.
2021-05-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 16, 2021)
Attorneys
Arrowood Indemnity Company
Britton C. Lewis — Carruthers & Roth, P.A., Respondent
Kathryn MacEwen Conti
Guy Thomas Conti — The Law Offices of Guy T. Conti, PLLC, Petitioner