In re Hanson

164 B.R. 632, 1994 Bankr. LEXIS 248, 1994 WL 62955
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Dakota
DecidedFebruary 28, 1994
DocketBankruptcy No. 92-40599
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 164 B.R. 632 (In re Hanson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Dakota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Hanson, 164 B.R. 632, 1994 Bankr. LEXIS 248, 1994 WL 62955 (S.D. 1994).

Opinion

PEDER K. ECKER, Bankruptcy Judge.

Dear counsel:

The matter before the court is a Motion for Avoidance of Poor Liens (Rule 4003(d)) filed by Salem, South Dakota, Attorney Michael E. Unke on behalf of Debtors and objected to by Madison, South Dakota, Attorney Wilson Kleibacker, acting as Lake County State’s Attorney representing Lake County, South Dakota. The issue is whether a county, whose only privity is with a debtor’s creditor, may refuse to satisfy and remove a poor lien filed against the debtor when the lien was created after the order of discharge was granted and the order released all dis-chargeable debts, including the underlying debt giving rise to the lien. This letter decision constitutes Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 7052.

BACKGROUND

On April 28 and August 31, 1991, unemployed Debtor Dennis E. Hanson received medical services from various health care providers, including Sioux Valley Hospital. On September 28, 1992, Sioux Valley Hospital Association obtained a $14,375.91 civil judgment against Debtors, which was filed with the Lake County Clerk of Courts. Shortly thereafter, on October 5, 1992, Debtors sought bankruptcy protection and filed a voluntary Chapter 7 petition for relief.1 On November 10, 1992, a motion was filed to avoid the judgment lien; the motion was granted January 6, 1993, and the order was served on both the hospital and the Lake County Clerk of Courts. An order granting Debtors’ discharge was entered the same date, and, immediately thereafter, the Court approved the Chapter 7 Trustee’s report of no assets and closed the bankruptcy estate. Two months later, on March 5, 1993, Lake County reimbursed Sioux Valley Hospital $8,971.282 and filed its statutory lien March 10, 1993.3 When Lake County refused to [634]*634release the lien, Debtors filed this motion October 14, 1993, stating the county’s position “not only abrogates the intention of the act of Congress, but also defeats debtors’ rehabilitative efforts.” An objection to the motion was filed, stating that, although the hospital’s reimbursement and lien filing occurred after the discharge was granted, both acts were timely, and, since the automatic stay was no longer in effect, the Court should declare the lien to be in full force and effect. Following a hearing, the Court took the matter under advisement.

DISCUSSION

Generally, liens not avoided during banki’uptey survive after bankruptcy. In re Braun, 152 B.R. 466 (Bankr.N.D.Ohio 1993); In re Walker, 151 B.R. 1006, 1009 (Bankr. E.D.Ark.1993); In re Brouse, 110 B.R. 539 (Bankr.D.Colo.1990); In re Bouchelle, 98 B.R. 81 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.1989); 11 U.S.C. §§ 524(a)(2), 727. The liens survive even if the obligation that formed the basis for the lien is discharged. In re Dillard, 118 B.R. 89 (Bankr.N.D.Ill.1990). A discharge granted under 11 U.S.C. § 524(a) affects the debt- or’s personal liability only; it does not affect the property of the estate from which debts may be satisfied. In re Smith, 119 B.R. 714 (Bankr.D.N.D.1990); In re Bormes, 14 B.R. 895, 898 (Bankr.D.S.D.1981). If a lien survives bankruptcy and there is property of the estate from which debts may be satisfied, the lien-holding creditor may pursue an in rem action to enforce the surviving lien. Id. Lien survival and the ability to pursue post-discharge lien enforcement applies only if the lien is found to be a valid, existing lien at the time the bankruptcy petition was filed. In re Koski, 149 B.R. 170 (Bankr.D.Idaho 1992). But what happens if the lien exists at the time of filing but is not perfected until shortly after the petition is filed? That was the issue presented to the Court in In re Claussen, 118 B.R. 1009 (Bankr.D.S.D.1990), offering an invitation to explore lien perfection as it relates to the ability to survive bankruptcy. A brief discussion of the case is appropriate for purposes of resolving the issue at hand.

In Claussen, a statutory lien existed on the date of filing, but it was an inchoate lien: Sioux Valley Hospital had provided indigent emergency medical services, gave notice to the county that services were provided,4 and submitted its request for reimbursement to the county, all before the patient’s spouse filed a voluntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition. In re Claussen, 118 B.R. at 1012. The county did not reimburse the hospital or file its indigent emergency medical services lien until roughly two months after the petition had been filed. Id. The issue to be resolved was whether the county’s lien, perfected during the period of the automatic stay, should not be discharged in light of the fresh start policy of the Bankruptcy Code and in light of the Code’s effort to provide equitable creditor treatment, especially if the underlying transaction was dischargeable. Id. The Court held the lien would be avoided. Id. Even though the Court noted that South Dakota lien laws require strict construction to permit recovery only where expressly indicated, it was the most basic tenets representing the spirit and purpose of bankruptcy that failed to offer any hope for the lien’s survival. Id. at 1013.

There were several fundamental bankruptcy concepts which provided independent bases for discharging the lien. First, the county’s post-petition acts to create the lien, specifically, reimbursing Sioux Valley Hospital and then filing the lien, were deemed null and void as violations of the automatic stay. Id. at 1015. Second, the lien was deemed invalid because it was not perfected on the date the petition was filed; a fatal flaw, because, to be enforceable, a lien must be in effect on the date of filing or, at least, relate back to the date of filing, and, pursuant to Section 545(2), the trustee may avoid such a lien to the extent it is unperfected. Id. at 1016, citing In re Pierce, 809 F.2d 1356, 1361 [635]*635(8th Cir.1987). Further, the parties were aligned in such a way that the only existing privity in contract was between the indigent patient and the hospital, as opposed to the indigent patient and the county; therefore, the necessary link that might allow the lien to relate back to the prepetition time of medical services was missing. Id. at 1013. Third, the Bankruptcy Code’s fresh start policy and scheme of equitable distribution allowed the lien to be discharged:

[Any law that would sentence] the innocent hospitalized pauper to a lifetime of nondis-chargeable medical debt[] would require eliminating any scintilla of equity. Such law would be absurd. An unforeseen catastrophic injury, resulting in a large unanticipated medical bill, is a scenario in which Congress intends the fresh start to apply and lift a debt’s unyielding yoke from the poor’s shoulders. A technicality of law cannot pervert Congress’ clear intent.-

Id. at 1019. Finally, the Court held that laws or actions yielding non-uniform bankruptcy laws should be struck down and any blatant abuse of the statutory hen power invalidated. Id. at 1021. In Claussen,

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Fonseca v. Government Employees Ass'n (Fonseca)
542 B.R. 628 (First Circuit, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
164 B.R. 632, 1994 Bankr. LEXIS 248, 1994 WL 62955, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-hanson-sdb-1994.