Illinois law, which permits victims to seek civil judgments to enforce unsatisfied criminal restitution orders, does not change the criminal origins of the restitution order and therefore find ing that the resulting civil judgment fell within the exception to discharge 74 (Bankr.N.D.Ohio 2004) (disagreeing with the debtor that a novation occurred, thus substituting a potentially nondischargeable debt under § 523(a)(15) for a dischargeable debt, when the debtor executed an agreement post-divorce regarding liability for his share of the parties’ joint tax obligations stating “a tiger does not change its stripes”); Moore v. Murphy (In re Murphy), 297 B.R. 332, 347 (Bankr.D.Mass.2003) (“It is well established, however, that claim preclusion does not bar a bankrup 248 (Bankr.D.N.H.1995) (<HOLDING>). The Debtor argues that Brown and Archer were
holding that college violated stay by not delivering transcript to chapter 7 debtor when debt had not yet been determined dischargeable holding that when a state court judgment was found not to be dischargeable under 11 usc  523a6 the associated attorneys fees were also not dischargeable holding that because the alleged settlement was never approved by the court under rule 9019 the settlement agreement was unenforceable holding that a mortgagee is required to send new legal notices if a debtor who had previously defaulted on a note defaults again after entering into a loan modification agreement holding that a debtor may not silently transform a health education assistance loan nondischargeable under 42 usc  292fg into dischargeable debt by entering into a settlement agreement that is approved by the court pursuant to which the debtor consents to judgment against him