spouse. See 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(15). A majority of courts, including this one, have concluded that the burden of proof for section 523(a)(15) is initially with the non-debtor spouse who must first establish that the debt, which arose from a divorce or support agreement, is not in the nature of alimony or support. The burden then shifts to the debtor to prove either an inability to pay or that the benefit to the debtor outweighs the detriment to the non-debtor spouse. See Craig v. Craig (In re Craig), 196 B.R. 305, 308 (Bankr.E.D.Va.1996); McGinnis v. McGinnis (In re McGinnis), 194 B.R. 917, 920 (Bankr.N.D.Ala.1996); Collins v. Florez (In re Florez), 191 B.R. 112, 115 (Bankr.N.D.Ill.1995). But see Greenwalt v. Greenwalt (In re Greenwalt), 200 B.R. 909, 913 (Bankr.W.D.Wash.1996) (<HOLDING>); Morris v. Morris (In re Morris), 197 B.R.
holding that the plaintiff bears the burden when relying on the discovery rule holding that the burden is on the plaintiff holding that the plaintiff bears the burden of proof for all elements of section 523a15 holding that the government bears the burden of proof with respect to the issue of whether termination for default was justified holding that the defendant bears the burden of proof and that such a disposition does not violate the due process clause