United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 16-6011

___________________________

In re: John F. Huonder; Tonnie Jo Huonder

lllllllllllllllllllllDebtors

------------------------------

John F. Huonder; Tonnie Jo Huonder

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellants

v.

Champion Milking Systems, LLC

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee

____________

Appeal from United States Bankruptcy Court 

for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul

____________

 Submitted: August 12, 2016

Filed: September 29, 2016

____________

Before SCHERMER, NAIL, and SHODEEN, Bankruptcy Judges.

____________

NAIL, Bankruptcy Judge.
DebtorsJohn F. Huonder and Tonnie Jo Huonder appeal the February 25, 2016

judgment of the bankruptcy court sanctioning Champion Milking Systems, LLC 1

("Champion") for violating the discharge injunction. We affirm.

BACKGROUND

Debtors commenced an adversary proceeding against Champion, seeking

compensatory damages, general damages, punitive damages, and attorney fees for

Champion's alleged violations of the discharge injunction. After hearing the matter, 2

the bankruptcy court entered two orders.

The first order awarded Debtors general damages of $1,000.00 for Champion's

violation of the discharge injunction and directed Debtors to file an itemized

statement of their attorney fees and costs. The second order, entered after Debtors

had complied with the first order, awarded Debtors attorney fees of $1,500.00 for

Champion's violation of the discharge injunction and directed the entry of judgment

in Debtors' favor for both the general damages awarded in the first order and the

attorney fees awarded in the second order. The bankruptcy court did not award

Debtors compensatory damages or punitive damages.

The bankruptcy clerk entered judgment in Debtors' favor as directed by the

bankruptcy court. Debtors timely appealed.

The Honorable Gregory F. Kishel, who has since retired but was then Chief

1

Judge, United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Minnesota.

A bankruptcy discharge "operates as an injunction against the commencement

2

or continuation of an action, the employment of process, or an act, to collect, recover

or offset any such debt as a personal liability of the debtor, whether or not discharge

of such debt is waived[.]" 11 U.S.C. § 524(a)(2).

-2-
STANDARD OF REVIEW

We review the bankruptcy court's award ofsanctions for an abuse of discretion. 

Missouri Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. Spencer (In re Spencer), 550 B.R. 766, 769 (B.A.P.

8th Cir. 2016). 

A court abuses its discretion when a relevant factor that

should have been given significant weight is not

considered; when an irrelevant or improper factor is

considered and given significant weight; or when all proper

factors and no improper ones are considered, but the court

commits a clear error of judgment in weighing those

factors.

City of Duluth v. Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, 702 F.3d 1147, 1152

(8th Cir. 2013).

DISCUSSION

Debtors argue the bankruptcy court erred in not awarding them all the attorney

fees they incurred in their adversary proceeding against Champion for its violation

of the discharge injunction. Debtors also argue the bankruptcy court erred in not

awarding them punitive damages for Champion's violation of the discharge

injunction. Both arguments fail, for the same reason: The record on appeal affords

us no basis for evaluating their merits.

Throughout their brief, Debtors make repeated references to various exhibits

that were admitted at the trial and to the bankruptcy court's "oral order." The record

on appeal, however, does not contain any such exhibits or a transcript of any such

oral order. We have only been provided the transcript of the trial, which ends with

the bankruptcy court's recessing after hearing the parties' closing arguments.

-3-
In its first order, the bankruptcy court indicated it held a continued telephonic

hearing several days after the trial and "memorialized its decision on the record by

reciting findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a) and

Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7052." Presumably, this is the oral order to which Debtors refer. 

We have not been provided a transcript of that hearing. 

We are thus unable to review the bankruptcy court's findings of fact or its

conclusions of law. Consequently, we cannot say the bankruptcy court abused its

discretion in reaching the decision it did. See Bank of Nebraska v. Rose (In re Rose),

483 B.R. 540, 544 (B.A.P. 8th Cir. 2012) (without a transcript, a reviewing court

cannot conclude a bankruptcy court's findings of fact are clearly erroneous).

CONCLUSION

We therefore affirm the bankruptcy court's February 25, 2016 judgment

sanctioning Champion for violating the discharge injunction. 

-4-