666 B.R. 794
Bankr. D. Minn.2025Background
- In 2010, Todd Christenson filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy and included a business debt to Steven Breitenfeldt as an unsecured claim.
- Breitenfeldt brought an adversary proceeding to have the debt declared nondischargeable under § 523(a)(2), (4), or (6), but the parties settled out of court and the case was dismissed without a court finding.
- Christenson received a bankruptcy discharge and the case closed in 2011. No court order declared the debt nondischargeable.
- Years later, Breitenfeldt filed a Confession of Judgment in state court based on the settlement, renewed the judgment, and initiated enforcement actions including a sheriff’s sale of Christenson’s property.
- Christenson reopened his bankruptcy to challenge Breitenfeldt's actions as violations of the discharge injunction, seeking to quiet title and for contempt.
- Both parties filed cross-motions for partial summary judgment; the court found no material facts in dispute and ruled on the legal issues.
Issues
| Issue | Christenson's Argument | Breitenfeldt's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the debt to Breitenfeldt discharged? | No nondischargeability finding; debt discharged | Settlement rendered debt enforceable post-discharge | Debt discharged; no court determination otherwise |
| Did Breitenfeldt’s collection actions violate discharge injunction? | Actions sought to collect discharged debt | Relied on enforceable post-bankruptcy agreement | Actions violated discharge injunction |
| Is Christenson liable for slander of title by filing Lis Pendens? | Filing was lawful under Minnesota law | Lis Pendens was wrongful and slandered title | No slander; filing was lawful and not malicious |
| Are the parties entitled to summary judgment? | Entitled on discharge/injunction claims | Entitled on settlement enforcability, slander | Christenson entitled; Breitenfeldt’s denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (articulates burden-shifting framework for summary judgment)
- Johnson v. Enron Corp., 906 F.2d 1234 (8th Cir. 1990) (describes non-movant's burden under summary judgment)
- Price v. Northern States Power Co., 664 F.3d 1186 (8th Cir. 2011) (summary judgment standard in 8th Circuit)
- Wermager v. Cormorant Tp. Bd., 716 F.2d 1211 (8th Cir. 1983) (summary judgment inappropriate if fact issues remain)
- In re King, 744 F.3d 565 (8th Cir. 2014) (enforcement of unapproved reaffirmation post-discharge violates injunction)
- Venture Bank v. Lapides, 800 F.3d 442 (8th Cir. 2015) (unenforceable reaffirmation triggers discharge injunction)
- Paidar v. Hughes, 615 N.W.2d 276 (Minn. 2000) (elements of slander of title under Minnesota law)