Larsen v. Jendusa-Nicolai
2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137662
| E.D. Wis. | 2010Background
- Larsen assaulted and bound his ex-wife, Jendusa-Nicolai, beat her with a baseball bat, and confined her in a snow-filled garbage can for over 18 hours, causing severe injuries and a miscarriage.
- He was convicted in state court of attempted first-degree intentional homicide and interference with custody; federally, he was sentenced for kidnapping and interstate domestic violence to life and 120 months respectively.
- Jendusa-Nicolai and family pursued civil claims for assault, battery, IIED, false imprisonment, and loss of society; Racine County court ruled in their favor.
- Larsen filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy on March 13, 2009; creditors sought a nondischargeability determination under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6).
- Bankruptcy court granted summary judgment finding issue preclusion barred relitigation of state court findings that supported a willful and malicious injury; bankruptcy court judgment was nondischargeable.
- On appeal, the district court affirmed, concluding the state court findings supported willful and malicious injury and that issue preclusion applied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether state court findings support willful and malicious injury under § 523(a)(6). | Larsen contends state court did not find a willful injury for all appellees. | Jendusa-Nicolai argues state court findings equate to willful injury. | State court findings support willful and malicious injury for § 523(a)(6). |
| Whether issue preclusion bars dischargeability of the Wisconsin judgment. | Larsen argues preclusion does not apply to his derivative claims | Appellees contend Wisconsin judgment decided willfulness and malice; preclusion applies. | Issue preclusion applies to bar relitigation of willful and malicious injury. |
| What standard of willfulness governs § 523(a)(6) in this context. | Larsen asserts an objective/substantial certainty standard should be required for willfulness. | Appellees rely on Geiger to mean willful requires actual intent to injure, not mere negligence. | Willfulness means actual intent to cause injury; the state court's findings satisfy willfulness. |
| Are derivative claims (loss of society/consortium) properly encompassed by § 523(a)(6). | Larsen challenges whether derivative claims were properly tied to willful injury. | Appellees assert derivative injuries flow from the willful and malicious injury to the primary victim. | Derivative debts are nondischargeable where tied to the willful and malicious injury to the primary victim. |
Key Cases Cited
- Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279 (1991) (dischargeability in bankruptcy; issue preclusion applies in § 523(a)(6) cases)
- Kawaauhau v. Geiger, 523 U.S. 57 (1998) (willful means intentional; distinguishes intentional torts from negligent acts)
- In re Thirtyacre, 36 F.3d 697 (7th Cir. 1994) (definition of malicious as conscious disregard or without just cause)
- In re Russell, 262 B.R. 449 (Bankr.N.D.Ind. 2001) (injury is invasion of protected rights; magnitude shown by damages)
- Bukowski v. Patel, 266 B.R. 838 (E.D.Wis. 2001) (derivative claims and willful/malicious standard; context for Wisconsin law)