Delaware Bankruptcy Insider:
Be In The Know

About This Blog


The Delaware Bankruptcy Insider is a premier blog designed to bring its readers a comprehensive analysis of the latest Delaware corporate bankruptcy news and rulings.  Brought to you by Ashby & Geddes, P.A.

Get Updates By Email

Topics

Judges

Recent Posts

Helpful Links


Federal Courts App
 (iTunes)
Federal Courts App (Google Play)
The Bankruptcy Code
Delaware Bankruptcy Court                                                                          Delaware Bankruptcy Court - Local Rules and Orders
Delaware District Court
Third Circuit Court of Appeals
U.S. Supreme Court
The United States Courts
Office of the United States Trustee for the Third Circuit
Delaware Bankruptcy American Inn of Court

For more information


Karen B. Skomorucha Owens, Esq.
(302) 504-3725
kowens@ashby-geddes.com

Ashby & Geddes, P.A.
500 Delaware Avenue
P.O. Box 1150
Wilmington, Delaware 19899-1150
(302) 654-1888               

Showing 6 posts in Bar Date.

The Bar Date Is Like A Statute Of Limitations; It Must Be Followed

In re Nortel Networks Inc., No. 09-10138 (KG), 2017 WL 2821535 (Bankr. D. Del. June 29, 2017)

In this Opinion, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Bankruptcy Court”) rendered a seemingly “harsh” decision necessitated by the “unreasonable relief” requested.  Op. at 16.  Seven years after the September 30, 2009 deadline to file proofs of claim (the “Bar Date”), SNMP Research International, Inc. (“SNMPRI”) and SNMP Research, Inc. (“SNMPR”, and together with SNMPRI, “SNMP”) moved for authority for SNMPRI to file amended proofs of claim and an order adding SNMPR as a claimant. Read More ›

Lack of “Scientific Certainty” Does Not Excuse Late Filing of a Proof of Claim

In re W.R. Grace & Co., No. 01-1139 (KG) (Bankr. D. Del. Dec. 28, 2016)

In this Opinion involving the standards for determining whether a party held an asbestos claim and excusable neglect for filing a late claim, the Court rejected Plum Creek Timber Co.’s (the “Claimant”) argument that it lacked “scientific certainty” with respect to its asbestos-related claim against W.R. Grace & Co. (together with its affiliated debtors, the “Debtors”).  Where the Claimant received actual and publication notice of the bar date in the case, the Court found the Claimant should have timely filed its claim even if it was contingent at the time of filing.  The Court also held that the Claimant did not satisfy the standards for excusable neglect and, as a result, granted the Debtors’ motion to enforce the discharge and injunction. Read More ›

Can A Publication Notice Satisfy Due Process For “An Entire Class Of Claimants That Are So Unknown As To Be Unknown Even To Themselves”?

In re Energy Future Holdings Corp., No. 14-10979 (CSS), 2015 WL 77416 (Bankr. D. Del. Jan. 7, 2015)

In the chapter 11 proceedings of Energy Future Holdings Corp. and its affiliated debtors (the “Debtors”) pending before the Delaware Bankruptcy Court, the Court was asked to establish a bar date for “claims of unknown persons that have yet to manifest any sign of illness from exposure to asbestos” (the “Unmanifested Claims” or the “Unmanifested Claimants”) so that the Debtors and parties participating in the ongoing marketing process of the Debtors could understand the extent and nature of outstanding liabilities and, ultimately, seek to bar any claims not properly and timely filed. Read More ›

Bar Date Notice Insufficient For Unknown Creditors Despite Publication Nationally And Locally

White v. Jacobs (In re New Century TRS Holdings, Inc.), No. 13-1719-SLR, 2014 WL 4100749 (D. Del. Aug. 19, 2014)

The central question in this appeal was whether notice of a debtors’ claims bar date was constitutionally sufficient to afford unknown creditors due process.*  Although publication notice of a bar date in national and local newspapers is often deemed sufficient for unknown creditors, the Delaware District Court held that, under the circumstances of this case, the notice was insufficient and vacated the Bankruptcy Court’s ruling.  In so ruling, the District Court observed that “when the bar date is set so close to the publication date, debtors have a heavier burden to ensure that notice is widespread.”  Id. at *6 n.8. Read More ›

More Opinions Addressing Pro Se Claimants in New Century TRS Holdings, Inc

Konar v. New Century TRS Holdings, Inc (In re New Century TRS Holdings, Inc), Adv. No. 12-50187 (KJC), 2014 WL 2198247 (Bankr. D. Del. May 23, 2014); In re New Century TRS Holdings, Inc, No. 07-10416, 2014 WL 2511339 (Bankr. D. Del. May 30, 2014) (“Cromwell”); In re New Century TRS Holdings, Inc, No. 07-10416, 2014 WL 2446823 (Bankr. D. Del. May 30, 2014) (“Russell”)

In In re New Century TRS Holdings, Inc, the Honorable Kevin J. Carey has spent significant time adjudicating pro se claimants’ late-filed proofs of claims that assert various alleged injuries relating to their respective mortgages.  In fact, in just a few months, the Court has written seven Opinions, four of which have already been reviewed by The Delaware Bankruptcy Insider herehere, and here.  In the Opinions, Judge Carey denied the pro se claimants’ late-filed claims, held that the claimants were “unknown” and therefore not entitled to actual notice of the bar date, and found no excusable neglect entitling the claimants to file late proofs of claim.  The three additional Memoranda discussed herein do not deviate from the Court’s past holdings. Read More ›

Creditors' Proofs of Claim Denied as Untimely Filed

In re New Century TRS Holdings, Inc., No. 07-10416 (KJC) (Bankr. D. Del. Mar. 4, 2014) ("Cromwell"); In re New Century TRS Holdings, Inc., Adv. No. 11-53199 (KJC) (Bankr. D. Del. Mar. 7, 2014) ("Silva")

On March 4, 2014, Judge Carey issued a Memorandum denying pro se creditor Cromwell's motion for an order approving her proof of claim as timely filed.  Then on March 7, 2014, Judge Carey issued a second Memorandum in the same bankruptcy case denying a similar motion filed by pro se creditor Silva. Read More ›