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.
Subscribe to RSS
Blog Contributors
Follow Us On LinkedinTopics
Judges and Courts
- Delaware Court of Chancery
- Delaware District Court
- Delaware Supreme Court
- Judge Brendan L. Shannon
- Judge Christopher S. Sontchi
- Judge Kevin Gross
- Judge Kevin J. Carey
- Judge Laurie Selber Silverstein
- Judge Mary F. Walrath
- Judge Peter J. Walsh
- Third Circuit Court of Appeals
- Uncategorized
- United States Supreme Court
Recent Posts
- Getting Noticed in the Digital Age: Delaware Bankruptcy Court Finds Email Notice Satisfies Due Process but Not Rule 2002
- Third Circuit Reversal Paves the Way For NextEra to Potentially Recover Administrative Expenses Incurred in Connection With Failed Merger
- Delaware District Court Disagrees with Bankruptcy Court’s Ruling and Holds That Committee’s Challenge Rights Survived Entry of the Sale Order and Consummation of Sale
HELPFUL LINKS
For more information
Getting Noticed in the Digital Age: Delaware Bankruptcy Court Finds Email Notice Satisfies Due Process but Not Rule 2002
In re Cyber Litigation Inc., 2021 WL 4927550 (Bankr. D. Del. Oct. 21, 2021)
In this Memorandum Opinion, Judge Goldblatt of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court considered whether a bar date notice sent via email to the principal of an unsecured creditor was sufficient to disallow the creditor’s untimely proof of claim. The Court ultimately concluded that the email notice comported with constitutional due process standards but did not meet the requirements of Bankruptcy Rule 2002, which instructs that such notices be provided to creditors by mail. As a result, the debtor’s timeliness objection was… 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… 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… 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… 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… 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. The Court follows a similar analysis when applying the excusable neglect standard… Read More