Available at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/bankruptcy_research_library/365/
Abstract:
When a creditor seeks to amend a proof of claim after the bar date has passed with an amount different to that provided in the original proof of claim, courts engage in an equitable analysis of multiple factors to determine whether to grant or deny the motion to amend. Under certain circumstances, Bankruptcy Rule 9006(b)(1) gives creditors an opportunity to file a proof of claim after the bar date has passed.
This memorandum examines whether a creditor can amend a timely-filed proof of claim after the bar date has passed with an amount that is unrelated to the costs in the original proof of claim. Part I discusses how a completely new claim will be disallowed under the Pioneer test. Part II discusses the length of the delay and whether a showing of good cause could allow the claim. Part III discusses how bankruptcy judges have full discretion over whether to allow an amended proof of claim. Part IV discusses chapter 11 proceedings and the importance of avoiding disruption after a plan is filed. Part V discusses how a creditor’s reliance on legal counsel will not fulfill the excusable neglect standard when their attorney misses a deadline such as the bar date.
Commentary:
While focused on late filed claims in Chapter 11 cases, this note would have benefited from examining how in Chapter 13 both Rule 3002.1 allows the filing of what are essentially post-petition claims by mortgage servicers and 11 U.S.C. §1305 explicitly allows post-petition tax claims, as well as claims necessary "for the debtor's performance under the plan." That Congress and the National Bankruptcy Rules Committee (with the approval of the Supreme Court and Congress) created procedures, requirements and restrictions in Chapter 13 but apparently not in Chapter 11, would seem pertinent.
With proper attribution, please share this post.
To read a copy of the transcript, please see:
Blog comments