1LAW Logo

Enforcing Divorce Payments After Your Ex Files Bankruptcy

Start a free AI-assisted chat and connect with an experienced New Mexico attorney, with no obligation.

JV

Reviewed & verified by A. Jason Velez, Esq.*

Managing Attorney, 1LAW · Last reviewed January 1, 2026

Legal Inquiry

Consumer Legal Issue

My ex husband agreed on paying the mortgage payment and vehicle payment in place of child support in our marital settlement agreement but he had filed bankruptcy in February and has missed a couple of payments.

Attorney Answer

Whether he can walk away from those payments turns on one classification: are they a "domestic support obligation" or a property settlement? Because he agreed to them in place of child support, you have a real argument they are support — and that is the argument worth everything here.

11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(5) excepts from discharge any debt that is a domestic support obligation as defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(14A). Whether an obligation qualifies is a question of federal law, decided by looking at the parties' intent when they made the agreement and at the substance of the obligation — not at the labels used in the settlement agreement. A § 523(a)(5) debt is nondischargeable in every chapter of bankruptcy.

11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(15) covers debts to a former spouse arising from a divorce that are not domestic support obligations. Here the chapter he filed becomes decisive. In Chapter 7, an (a)(15) debt is nondischargeable. In Chapter 13 it is dischargeable, because 11 U.S.C. § 1328(a)(2) excepts § 523(a)(5) from the Chapter 13 discharge but does not except § 523(a)(15). If he filed Chapter 13 and a court treats the mortgage and vehicle payments as a property settlement rather than support, they can be wiped out.

In Taylor v. Taylor, 737 F.3d 670 (10th Cir. 2013), the Tenth Circuit — which governs bankruptcy questions arising in New Mexico — affirmed that a divorce-related debt one former spouse owed the other was nondischargeable under § 523(a)(15), while affirming dismissal of the § 523(a)(5) claim because the creditor spouse had not alleged facts showing the debt was in the nature of support for him. Read that as a warning as much as support: the party asserting nondischargeability carries the burden, and the support characterization is fact-dependent and can fail.

On the state side, NMSA 1978 § 40-4-7 gives the district court authority to "make and enforce by attachment or otherwise" its orders, and under Subsection G to "modify and change any order or agreement merged into an order" concerning the children, with exclusive continuing jurisdiction until the support obligation ends. That, with the court's civil contempt power, is how the settlement obligation gets enforced — once the dischargeability question is sorted and the automatic stay allows it.

What you can do

1. Find out which chapter he filed and the case number, and get the date first set for the meeting of creditors. It is public record on PACER. 2. Confirm whether you were listed as a creditor and whether notices went to your correct address. 3. Pull your marital settlement agreement and mark the language showing the mortgage and vehicle payments were agreed in place of child support. That language is your evidence of intent. 4. Before you push the reopened divorce case toward a contempt hearing, get the automatic stay checked. Enforcement against a debtor mid-bankruptcy can violate the stay and rebound on you. 5. Get a bankruptcy attorney to look at this now, specifically on whether to file an adversary complaint under § 523(a)(15) as a protective measure while arguing the obligation is really an (a)(5) support debt. 6. Keep paying attention to the mortgage itself. If the house is yours, a missed payment history damages you regardless of who was supposed to pay.

⏱ Time limits apply. A complaint to determine dischargeability of a non-support debt under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(15) must be filed within sixty days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4007(c). A § 523(a)(5) domestic support obligation carries no such bar date. Because the correct characterization is exactly what is in dispute, the sixty-day date in his case is the one to find first.

Cases Cited

Published decisions relevant to this issue, provided as legal background rather than advice about any particular case.

  • Taylor v. Taylor, 737 F.3d 670 (10th Cir. 2013) — United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
    On appeal from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Tenth Circuit, which had affirmed the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Mexico, the Tenth Circuit affirmed that a debt one former spouse owed the other arising out of their divorce — there, a judgment for spousal support overpayments — was nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(15), and separately affirmed dismissal of the claim that the same debt was a nondischargeable "domestic support obligation" under § 523(a)(5) because the creditor spouse had not alleged facts showing the debt was in the nature of support for him. The opinion sets out the governing framework: whether an obligation is "in the nature of support" is a question of federal law resolved by a dual inquiry into the parties' intent at the time of the agreement and the substance of the obligation, looking past the labels in the settlement agreement, with the party asserting nondischargeability bearing the burden by a preponderance. That is exactly the analysis for whether this consumer's ex-husband's MSA mortgage and vehicle obligation survives his bankruptcy.

*Attorney review is supported by AI-assisted drafting and legal research algorithms. Use of this Chat does not create an attorney-client relationship.

By using this service you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Courts & Legal Aid in New Mexico

Frequently Asked Questions

Does calling it "in lieu of child support" in our agreement settle it?

No. The classification is a question of federal law that looks past the labels in the settlement agreement to the parties' intent at the time and the substance of the obligation. Your agreement's wording is strong evidence of intent, but it is evidence, not the answer.

Can I still ask for actual child support going forward?

Yes. Under NMSA 1978 § 40-4-7(G) the district court keeps exclusive continuing jurisdiction over the children's support and can modify an agreement merged into the decree. If the arrangement he agreed to has collapsed, asking the court to replace it with a support order is a separate route from fighting over the bankruptcy.

Am I allowed to contact him about the missed payments while he is in bankruptcy?

That depends on the automatic stay, and getting it wrong can expose you to sanctions. Have the stay checked before you send demands, file contempt motions, or take collection steps, and route the question through a bankruptcy attorney rather than assuming a support obligation is exempt.

Privacy Policy Terms of Use Your Privacy Choices