Kathleen Hvass Sanberg

How Judge Sanberg rules, drawn from 15 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Sanberg no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

Court
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Minnesota
Position
bankruptcy
Status
Retired 2022
Served
2012–2022
Commissioned
2012-08-24
Signed orders read
15

How Judge Sanberg decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

Property-valuation relief required reliable evidence tied to the property rather than automated internet estimates.

“Internet searches are insufficient evidence of property value because they are at best questionable and at worst evidence of nothing.”

Constructive-fraud summary judgment followed when undisputed evidence established insolvency and the absence of reasonably equivalent value.

“Plaintiff has shown as a matter of law that PCI did not receive reasonably equivalent value for the Transfers and that PCI made the Transfers while insolvent.”

Procedural preferences

A Chapter 13 fresh start did not by itself justify discriminatory treatment among unsecured creditors.

“A debtor’s interest in a ‘fresh start’ is not a sufficient basis to justify discrimination under § 1322(b)(1) by itself, rather, the interests of creditors must also be considered.”

A fact-intensive equitable defense could not support summary judgment where the estate entered bankruptcy under an independent receiver.

“There was no wrongdoer at the time of the filing the petition. Thus, the receivership prevents the application of the in pari delicto defense.”

Cautions

The bankruptcy disclosure duty required complete schedules without forcing trustees or creditors to reconstruct omitted information.

“The effectiveness of the bankruptcy system depends on the Debtor’s complete candor, and it is not the job of the trustee or creditor to search for information about the Debtor that should be readily disclosed in his bankruptcy Schedules and Statements.”

Discharge revocation was treated as an exceptional remedy requiring strict proof of every element.

“Revocation of discharge is a harsh and severe result.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

In re Flagship Franchises of Minnesota, LLC
· 2013-01-04
Motion to waive patient care ombudsman (the debtor) Granted

“The appointment of an ombudsman is not necessary in this case and, therefore, the motion is granted.”

In re Slovak
· 2013-03-19
Motion to determine property value (the debtor) Denied

“The Debtor’s motion to determine value of property is denied.”

In re Johnson
· 2013-07-16
Motion to reopen bankruptcy case (the debtors) Denied

“The debtors’ application to reopen their chapter 7 case is DENIED.”

Atkins v. Bank of America, N.A. (In re Atkins)
· 2013-09-04
Application for default judgment (the debtors) Granted in part

“Based on these findings, the court denies in part and grants in part the plaintiffs’ application for default judgment.”

Manty v. Bougie (In re Bougie)
· 2014-05-16
Summary judgment (the Chapter 7 trustee) Granted

“The court grants summary judgment to the plaintiff for the reasons stated below.”

In re Jordahl
· 2014-08-27
Objection to plan confirmation (the Chapter 13 trustee) Granted

“The chapter 13 trustee’s motion is granted.”

Hernandez v. Sulier (In re Sulier)
· 2015-11-25
Request to except debt from discharge (the creditor-plaintiff) Denied

“The defendant’s debt to the plaintiff is not excepted from the defendant’s discharge.”

Stoebner v. Larson (In re Larson)
· 2016-03-02
Objection to discharge (the United States Trustee) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED: The defendant’s discharge is denied pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(4)(A).”

Kelley v. JPMorgan Chase & Co. (In re Petters Co.)
· 2016-08-31
Motions to dismiss (the defendants) Granted in part

“The motions to dismiss are granted in part and denied in part.”

Kelley v. Opportunity Finance, LLC (In re Petters Co.)
· 2016-12-01
Motions to dismiss (the defendants) Granted in part

“The Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss are granted in part and denied in part consistent with the rulings set forth herein, as well as in this Court’s May 19, 2016, and May 31, 2016, orders.”

Kelley v. Opportunity Finance, LLC (In re Petters Co.)
· 2016-12-07
Judgment on the pleadings (DZ Bank) Granted in part

“The Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings brought by Defendant DZ Bank in Adv. No. 10-4301 is granted in part and denied in part as discussed herein.”

Kelley v. BMO Harris Bank N.A. (In re Petters Co.)
· 2017-02-24
Motions to dismiss (BMO Harris Bank) Granted in part

“The Motion is granted in part and denied in part.”

A historical record

Judge Sanberg no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.