Plaintiffs initiated an adversary proceeding seeking a determination that the debt they allegedly held against the debtors was non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A), including for fraud in the inducement, false representation, and actual fraud.  The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish liability on a claim.  Without liability on a claim, the court held that the plaintiffs could not show that the debtors owed them a debt.  The existence of a debt is an essential element of a section 523(a)(2)(A) action.  Moreover, the court determined that the plaintiffs’ evidence was insufficient to support a finding that the debt allegedly owed was non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A). Therefore, the court granted the debtors’ Rule 52(c) motion.