analyzing the second prong of the Brunner test to determine "undue
hardship," how should courts weigh speculation on the borrower's future
income potential? And, if a borrower's loan defaults, becoming immediately
due in full, was Rosenberg correct in holding that the repayment period has
ended?

When a company submits testimony from an employee who did not play a
personal role in the unfolding of the events and was merely supplied
documentation in preparation of trial, under what circumstances would the
employee's testimony constitute lay testimony?

In analyzing the second prong of the Brunner test to determine 'undue hardship,' how should courts weigh speculation on the borrower's future income potential? And, if a borrower's loan defaults, becoming immediately due in full, was Rosenberg correct in holding that the repayment period has ended?