priority period of section 507(a)(8)(A)(i) is suspended by 11 U.S.C. § 108(c) and 26 U.S.C. § 6503(b) and (h), for the time that the automatic stay prevents the IRS from collecting outstanding tax debts. Id. at 493; see also Saunders v. United States, 240 B.R. 636 (S.D.Fla.l9 (In re Harris), 203 B.R. 558, 560 (Bankr.D.Del. 1996) (“I conclude that ‘the literal application of [§ 523(a)(15) ] will produce a result demonstrably at odds with the intentions of its drafters’ and that the literal statutory language of § 523(a)(15)(A) need not be followed. Therefore, I agree with the court in Finaly that only the debtor’s spouse or former spouse can maintain an action under § 523(a)(15).”) (internal citation omitted); In re Kirkish v. Meritor Sav. Bank, 144 B.R. 367, 369 (Bankr. W.D.Mich.1992) (<HOLDING>). Section 502(b)(3) originated from the second
holding that 11 usc  523a8 does not prohibit comaker or cosigners of a student from discharging the debt because the legislative history clearly focusing on the students nondischargability compels a narrow interpretation of what constitutes an education loan so as not to include comakers or cosigners within the provision recognizing two lines of authority one where courts find prevention of unfair competition to be primary purpose and other where courts prescribed a broader interpretation of the statute focusing on the multiple objectives of congress in enacting the unrelated business income tax and concluding that a study of the statute the regulations the legislative history and the cases inclines us toward the latter view holding that the njcfa applies to the offering sale or provision of consumer credit  here 100000 loan for the education of plaintiffs daughter holding that we may consult legislative history as an aid to the interpretation of ambiguous text holding that records of students evaluation by school psychologist were not subject to the psychologistpatient privilege because the student and his mother did not expect the communications to remain confidential and because the purpose of the interview was to  assess  the students need for special education services not for the purpose of treatment or counseling