fail to meet the elements of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6) because the jury finding in connection with exemplary damages was not based solely on debtor’s intentional and malicious conduct but in the alternative on debtor’s heedless and reckless conduct, which, debtor urges, is insufficient to meet the willful and malicious standard of 11 U.S.C. § 528(a)(6). The Court finds that regardless of whether heedless and reckless conduct satisfies the elements of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6), the exemplary damages were awarded because of debt- or’s breach of fiduciary duty and, therefore, are non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4), along with the compensatory damages which are non-dischargeable under that section. See e.g. St. Laurent v. Ambrose (In re St. Laurent), 991 F.2d 672 (11th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). Although the St. Laurent court limited its
holding that regardless of dischargeability of exemplary damages under section 523a6 punitive damages flowing from the same course of fraudulent conduct necessitating an award of compensatory damages are not dischargeable in bankruptcy under section 523a2a holding that conduct must be beyond the fraud which supported compensatory damages to award punitive damages holding punitive damages nondischargeable under  523a6 when such damages are based on the same conduct as the underlying nondischargeable judgment holding that when compensatory damages are nominal a much higher ratio of punitive damages to compensatory damages can be contemplated holding that a plaintiff may receive both treble damages under rico and state law punitive damages for the same course of conduct