or a legal right. The Findings also show that the Lien Claims were a “deceit, artifice, trick, or design involving direct and active operation of the mind, used to circumvent and cheat another.” Finally, the Findings show that fraudulent scheme caused damage or harm to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs are entitled to summary judgment that their claims arising from Defendant’s fraudulent Lien Claims are nondis-chargeable under § 523(a)(2)(A). 2. § 528(a)(6) Claim. Debts arising from “willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity” are excepted from the general discharge. 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). Section 523(a)(6) requires that the debtor’s actions be both willful and malicious. Panalis v. Moore (In re Moore), 357 F.3d 1125, 1129 (10th Cir. 2004) (<HOLDING>). The “willful” element requires both an
holding that there must be proof of both a willful act and malicious injury to establish nondischargeability under section 523a6 holding that  523a6 requires the actor to intend the injury not just the act that leads to the injury holding that either objective substantial certainty or subjective motive meets the supreme courts definition of willful  injury in  523a6 holding that a mere deliberate or intentional act that causes injury is not sufficient to establish willfulness in the context of 11 usc  523a6 holding that the debtors knowing act of failing to obtain workers compensation insurance so that the employer owed an employee a debt after the employee suffered a workplace injury was not the sort of willful and malicious injury required for nondischargeability under  523a6 because it cannot not be said that the employer intended for the employee to suffer a fall or that there was an unbroken chain of events leading from the employers intentional act to the employees physical injury