"fraud” to mean actual or positive fraud rather than fraud implied by law. 3 Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 523.08[5], at 523-58 (footnotes omitted). [17] 17. Some courts require the creditor to have reasonably relied on the representations, but the Fifth Circuit does not. See In re Allison, 960 F.2d at 484-85 & n. 3 (citing cases). 18 . Other circuits have applied a uniform standard resembling our "actual fraud” standard to all debts falling under § 523(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., Britton v. Price (In re Britton), 950 F.2d 602, 604 (9th Cir.1991) ("The Ninth Circuit has employed a five-part test for determining when a debt in nondischargeable under section 523(a)(2)(A).”); Caspers v. Van Home (In re Van Home), 823 F.2d 1285, 1287 (8th Cir.1987) ("To succeed in a F.2d 1061, 1064 (11th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>); see also In re Lacy, 947 F.2d at 1277
holding that statecourt breach of fiduciary duty judgment precluded relitigation of same issue in dischargeability proceeding recognizing that even though standards of proof and findings in care and protection proceeding are identical to those in subsequent consent to adoption proceeding collateral estoppel inapplicable because incentive to litigate custody or appeal findings from earlier proceeding which are limited and do not carry same degree of finality may be substantially less than incentive to litigate or appeal findings in adoption proceeding which permanently terminates legal parentchild relationship holding that resolution of issue underlying statecourt fraud judgment precluded relitigation of same issue in nondischargeability proceeding holding that statecourt consent judgment containing findings of fraud precluded relitigation of same issue in dischargeability proceeding holding that because relitigation of issue was barred by collateral estoppel res judicata determination of finality of judgment dismissed for lack of standing was not relevant