# In Re Marjorie Jo Faish, Debtor. Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency v. Marjorie Jo Faish

> Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · January 16, 1996 · 72 F.3d 298

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9488753

## Case

- **Full name:** In Re Marjorie Jo FAISH, Debtor. PENNSYLVANIA HIGHER EDUCATION ASSISTANCE AGENCY v. Marjorie Jo FAISH, Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
- **Decided:** January 16, 1996
- **Citations:** 72 F.3d 298
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing
- **Judges:** Scirica, Cowen, Roth, Sloviter, Becker, Stapleton, Mansmann, Greenberg, Nygaard, Alito, Lewis, McKee, Sarokin
- **Cited by:** 233 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9488753

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining that “undue hardship” is dependent upon three factors: (1) whether a debtor is able to maintain a minimal standard of living for themselves and their dependents if forced to repay the loans; (2) whether additional circumstances exist indicating that this state of af…
- finding that, although $300.00 student loan payment would significantly impact the disposable income of debtor who earned a yearly salary of $27,-000.00, repayment of student loan would not impose an undue hardship on the Debtor and her son
- finding that debtor failed to demonstrate undue hardship despite “ ‘significant’ ” health problems arising from affliction with Crohn’s disease where such condition did not interfere with her ability to perform her job
- noting that the “undue hardship” standard “safeguards the financial integrity of the student loan program by not permitting debtors who have obtained the substantial benefits of an education funded by taxpayer dollars to dismiss their obligation simply because repayment of the…
- concluding that single mother did not meet first prong where she made salary of $27,000 in 1993, faced loan payments of $300, and supported one son

## Opinion text

SUR PETITION FOR REHEARING
Jan. 16, 1996.
The petition for rehearing filed by appellant having been submitted to the judges who participated in the decision of this court and to all the other available circuit judges of the circuit in regular active service, and no judge who concurred in the decision having asked for rehearing, and a majority of the circuit judges of the circuit in regular active service not having voted for rehearing by the court in banc, the petition for rehearing is denied.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9488753. Public record. Not legal advice.