In assessing the applicability of Code § 523(a)(6), some circuits have essentially collapsed the terms “willful” and “malicious,” applying a unitary test. See, e.g., In re McClendon, 765 F.3d 501 (5th Cir. 2014) (applying the unitary standard and “defining a willful and malicious injury as one where there is either an objective substantial certainty of harm or a subjective motive to cause harm”). Other circuits utilize a two-pronged approach, where “willful” and “malicious” remain separate elements for the courts to review. Today, the present court explicitly adopted the two-pronged test. Definition of “willful” injury for purpose of Code § 523(a)(6): A “willful” injury, for purposes of § 523(a)(6), requires “actual intent to cause injury,” not merely a deliberate or intentional act that leads to injury….

