This article examines the role of debtor intent and good faith in the determination of dischargeability under United States bankruptcy law. Cummings analyzes how bankruptcy courts assess subjective intent and objective conduct when evaluating whether particular debts fall within statutory exceptions to discharge, emphasizing that discharge is conditioned on judicial findings rather than automatic operation.
The article surveys case law interpreting provisions of the Bankruptcy Code that limit discharge where debts are incurred through fraud, willful misconduct, or bad-faith behavior. Cummings explains that courts treat dischargeability as a fact-intensive inquiry, requiring examination of surrounding circumstances, debtor conduct, and evidentiary standards. The analysis highlights the judiciary’s role in policing the boundaries of discharge to preserve the integrity of the bankruptcy system.
By focusing on intent and good faith as structural filters, the work clarifies that bankruptcy discharge operates as a regulated legal mechanism rather than a mechanical remedy. The article situates dischargeability within broader institutional concerns, including creditor protection, systemic fairness, and statutory purpose, demonstrating how courts balance debtor relief against abuse prevention.
This work reflects contemporary judicial treatment of discharge as a conditional privilege governed by statutory limits and judicial oversight. It provides insight into how modern courts enforce the boundaries of dischargeability within the framework established by Congress and interpreted through precedent.
Citation
Cummings, A. (2016). Debt discharge, intent, and good faith. St. John’s Law Review.