injunction and the money damages are nondischargeable in bankruptcy. In July, 1998, this court granted Dent Wizard retroactive relief from stay to validate the March 30th judgment and enforce its injunction against Brown. Dent Wizard now seeks judgment, as a matter of law, that the Missouri judgment is nondischargeable. II. DISCUSSION A. Dischargeability of the Injunction Dent Wizard seeks a determination that the injunction which it obtained in the Missouri judgment does not constitute a claim under Bankruptcy Code Section 101(5), and thus cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. The Code defines “claim” broadly, in relevant part, as a “right to an equitable remedy for breach of performance if s inding that the injunction did constitute a claim); In re Brown, 1997 WL 786994 (E.D.Pa.1997) (<HOLDING>). I find Ward convincing in its argument,
holding that equitable relief under rico is available only to the government holding damages do not constitute other equitable relief holding that jurys finding was binding on court considering claim for equitable relief holding that the creditors right to equitable relief constituted a dischargeable claim holding that a jury trial was not required when the money demand although specific was incidental and ancillary to the equitable relief requested and would ripen only if equitable relief were granted