After divorce bankruptcy

Fast v. Fast (May 5, 2009): The Minnesota Court of Appeals examined the issue of one party having their debts discharged through bankruptcy and the effect on the other party. Prior to the divorce, both parties were liable for a Wells Fargo loan. Mr. Fast was awarded the parties' business and was to take full responsibility for the parties business debt, the Wells Fargo loan, holding Ms. Fast "harmless therefrom". After the divorce, Mr. Fast filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy and had this Wells Fargo loan discharged; whereupon, Wells Fargo sought payment from Ms. Fast. "The primary issue [was] whether the district court erred in concluding that [Mr. Fast's] obligation in the marriage dissolution to hold [Ms. Fast] harmless on the Wells Fargo debt was discharged in the bankruptcy proceeding." The Minnesota Court of Appeals found that the district court erred in it interpretation of the Bankruptcy Code and that Mr. Fast must meet his hold-harmless obligation. In other words, Mr. Fast was still responsible for the Wells Fargo loan, not Ms. Fast. Bankrutpcy cannot shift the debt from one party to another if there is hold harmless language in the dissolution.