In Re McQueen

228 B.R. 408, 41 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 471, 1998 Bankr. LEXIS 1742
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Tennessee
DecidedDecember 15, 1998
DocketBankruptcy 396-10336, 396-10673, 397-01086, 397-02580, 397-04930, 397-07054, 397-07974, 397-08255, 397-08451, 397-09263, 397-09937, 397-10246, 397-10729, 398-00170 and 398-01003
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 228 B.R. 408 (In Re McQueen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re McQueen, 228 B.R. 408, 41 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 471, 1998 Bankr. LEXIS 1742 (Tenn. 1998).

Opinion

ORDER

GEORGE C. PAINE, II, Chief Judge.

In each of these chapter 13 cases proofs of claims were filed after the deadlines in Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 3002 1 and the chapter 13 trustee moved to disallow the late filed claims. 2 11 U.S.C. § 502 was *410 amended by Congress in 1994 to add subsection (b)(9) which provides that claims shall be allowed except to the extent that:

(9) proof of such claim is not timely filed, except to the extent tardily filed as permitted under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 726(a) of this title or under the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, except that a claim of a governmental unit shall be timely filed if it is filed before 180 days after the date or the order for relief or such time later as the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure may provide.

11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(9) (1998) (emphasis added). In chapter 13 cases, the 1994 amendment imposes disallowance as to the consequence of untimely filing without regard to whether the creditor has notice of the bar date. Section 509(b)(9) provides no statutory exceptions to its mandate that claims must be filed “timely.”

The definition of “timely” in Bankruptcy Rule 3002 is of no help to creditors that neglect to file within the deadlines or are *411 that are disabled to do so. Absent some equitable grounds to “toll” the claims deadline, the 1994 amendment to § 502 seems not to have contemplated the hardship for debtors and creditors of an immutable disallowance role in chapter 13 cases. 3

Failure of debtor to properly notice a creditor of bankruptcy clearly raises constitutional concerns with respect to the effects of confirmation and discharge. However, as § 502(b)(9) is presently written, the court is without legal or equitable grounds to allow a late filed proof of claim in a chapter 13 case, even absent proper notice of the bar date for filing proofs of claims. 4 The court must await legislative action to remedy this defect in the claims allowance process.

Accordingly, the court will, without prejudice, overrule the objections to the chapter 13 trustee’s motions to disallow the late filed claims pursuant to § 502(b)(9) in all of the above cases. 5

It is therefore SO ORDERED.

1

. Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 3002 provides in part:

(c) TIME FOR FILING. In a chapter 7 liquidation, chapter 12 family farmer's debt adjustment, or chapter 13 individual’s debt adjustment case, a proof of claim, is timely filed if it is filed not later than 90 days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors called under § 341(a) of the Code, except as follows: (1) A proof of claim filed by a governmental unit is timely filed if it is filed not later than 180 days after the date of the order for relief. On motion of a governmental unit, before the expiration of such period and for cause shown, the court may extend the time for filing of a claim by the governmental unit....

Fed R.Bankr.P. 3002 (1998).

2

. In all cases, an objection was raised by a creditor or the debtor(s) to the trustee's motion to disallow the late filed claims and the matters were set for hearing. The facts of the cases are similar:

1. No. 396-10336: Postconfirmation and after the bar date for filing a proof of claim, the debtors sought to add Skinner's TV & Appliance, Inc. as a creditor to their chapter 13 plan. The debtors had failed to list Skinner TV & Appliance in their petition as a creditor. The creditor never received notice of that motion. Upon learning of the debtors’ bankruptcy the creditor filed a proof of claim and sought relief from the stay. The parties resolved the stay relief motion by agreeing to valuation of the collateral and how the claim would be paid. The chapter 13 trustee then filed a motion to disallow the late filed claim pursuant to § 502(b)(9).
2. No. 396-10673: Postconfirmation and after the bar date for filing a proof of claim, National City Bank learned of the debtor's bankruptcy filing. The debtor failed to list National City Bank as a creditor. The creditor filed a claim, and the chapter 13 trustee filed a motion to disallow the late filed claim pursuant to § 502(b)(9). National City Bank argues that the time for filing its proof of claim should be extended pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9006(b)(l)(2).
3. No. 397-01086: Postconfirmation and after the bar date for filing a proof of claim, the IRS learned of the debtor's bankruptcy filing. The IRS was not listed in the debtor's schedules. The IRS filed a proof of claim after the bar date and the chapter 13 trustee filed a motion to disallow the late filed claim pursuant to § 502(b)(9).
4. No. 397-02580: Postconfirmation and after the bar date for filing a proof of claim, the IRS learned of the debtors' bankruptcy filing. The IRS was not listed in the debtors' schedules. The IRS filed a proof of claim after the bar date and the chapter 13 trustee filed a motion to disallow the late filed claim pursuant to § 502(b)(2).
*410 5. No. 397-04930: The Internal Revenue Service filed a proof of claim after the 90 day bar. The chapter 13 trustee filed a motion to disallow the late filed claim pursuant to § 502(b)(9). The parties were attempting to settle this matter to allow the late filed claim without reducing the dividend to unsecured creditors.
6. No. 397-070S4: SunTrust Bank filed a proof of claim after the 90 day bar. The chapter 13 trustee filed a motion to disallow the late filed claim. Although SunTrust did not appear or otherwise respond to the trustee’s motion, the debtor advocated allowance of the claim based on an "equitable tolling” theory.
7. No. 397-07974: Postconfirmation and after the bar date for filing proofs of claims, the Tennessee Department of Human Services learned of the debtor’s bankruptcy filing. Although the debtor had listed DHS in her petition, the address for service was incorrect.

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

Related

In Re Namusyule
300 B.R. 100 (District of Columbia, 2003)
In Re McLarry
273 B.R. 753 (S.D. Texas, 2002)
In Re Kelley
259 B.R. 580 (E.D. Texas, 2001)
In Re Charles C. Gardenhire
209 F.3d 1145 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)
Gardenhire v. United States Internal Revenue Service
209 F.3d 1145 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)
Internal Revenue Service v. Hildebrand
245 B.R. 287 (M.D. Tennessee, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
228 B.R. 408, 41 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 471, 1998 Bankr. LEXIS 1742, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-mcqueen-tnmb-1998.