The following excerpt is from Catlow, Matter of, 663 F.2d 960 (9th Cir. 1981):
Catlow argues that the district and bankruptcy courts below misapplied section 17(a)(7) in holding the attorney's fee award nondischargeable. He acknowledges that this circuit has previously ruled that attorney's fees awarded to a bankrupt's former spouse in a California divorce action is in the nature of spousal support and is therefore not dischargeable. See Jones v. Tyson (In re Jones), 518 F.2d 678, 680-81 (9th Cir. 1975). 2 He contends, however, that even if this rule applies to Arizona divorce proceedings, it does not extend to post-divorce proceedings that are unrelated to enforcing spousal support obligations. As the proceeding at issue here occurred two years after his divorce and dealt exclusively with child custody, he contends that the fee award may not be characterized as spousal support and is therefore dischargeable in bankruptcy. 3 We disagree.
The Arizona statute authorizing attorney's fees, like the statute considered in Jones v. Tyson, permits a fee award upon a showing of financial necessity and requires a court to consider the respective needs and incomes of both spouses prior to making an award. See Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. 25-324 (1976). 4 Arizona courts have ruled consistently that this statutory obligation is founded upon a spouse's duty of support to his or her spouse. The courts have held that "attorney's fees are as much for the wife's
Page 963
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.