491 B.R. 550
Bankr. E.D. Wis.2013Background
- Debtor filed Chapter 13; creditor Roeske was listed and notified of a 2010 bar date but did not file; plan was confirmed and distributions began.
- Case converted to Chapter 7 in 2012 at debtor's request; clerk notice warned not to file a claim unless notified.
- Debtor moved to reconvert to Chapter 13 in late 2012; case reconverted to Chapter 13 on December 28, 2012.
- Clerk issued a Chapter 13 notice setting a new bar date of May 7, 2013; creditor filed Claim No. 21 on January 28, 2013.
- Trustee argued Claim should have complied with the original August 10, 2010 bar date; debtor/Clerk notices created potential error guiding filing.
- Court resolves that Clerk’s second notice justified filing under that date and credits reliance on Clerk’s notice; trustee objection overruled.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether late-filed claim is allowable when second bar date issued by Clerk after reconversion. | Roeske relied on the Clerk’s second notice. | Trustee says bar date from original notice controls. | Yes; the claim is allowed. |
| Whether reconversion and a new bar date justify allowing a late claim filed under the new deadline. | Claimant relied on Clerk’s reconversion notice. | Original bar date should govern; error not to be borne by claimant. | Yes; reconversion notice supports allowance. |
| Role of clerk’s notice vs. debtor/trustee responsibility for deadlines. | Clerk’s notice binding; parties should rely on it. | Debtor/Trustee could have corrected the error. | Clerk’s notice governs; debtor/trustee bear consequences for clerical error. |
| Whether Rule 3002(c) or other exceptions apply to justify the allowance. | Exception not needed; equitable relief justified. | Rule 3002(c) explicit exceptions; not directly applicable. | Not necessary to decide; claim allowed on equitable grounds. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Washington, 483 B.R. 871 (Bankr.E.D.Wis.2012) (late filing may be allowed when creditor lacks notice until after bar date)
- In re Moss, 289 F.3d 540 (8th Cir.2002) (equitable relief under 105(a) for clerk-induced untimeliness)
- In re Harper, 489 B.R. 251 (Bankr.N.D.Ga.2013) (affirmative clerk error can support equitable late filing; but usually not)
- In re Hershkovitz, 101 B.R. 816 (Bankr.N.D.Ga.1989) (clerk’s second deadline notice erroneous; debtor bears consequences)