On an issue where the courts are divided, the so-called mailbox presumption will not deem a proof of claim to have been timely filed when the clerk time-stamps the claim after the bar date, according to Bankruptcy Judge Lena Mansori James of Winston Salem, N.C.
The bar date in a chapter 7 case was September 13. The clerk stamped the claim as filed on September 14, one day late.
The trustee objected to the claim as untimely. Citing the mailbox presumption, the creditor filed an affidavit stating that the creditor had mailed the claim on September 7.
Judge James said that the courts are split on whether the mailbox presumption applies to a proof of claim.
Although the Fourth Circuit has not ruled on the precise issue, the Richmond-based appeals court had decided in 1976, before the electronic filing of court documents, that the timeliness of an appeal from the bankruptcy court can be measured from the date the notice of appeal is mailed, not the date of receipt by the clerk.
Likewise, the Seventh Circuit and some lower courts have held that timely and accurate mailing of a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim was received and filed. In those cases, Judge James pointed out that the claims were absent from the courts’ files.
Judge James found a Third Circuit opinion to be persuasive in saying that mailing is not filing. Like the Philadelphia-based court, she said that applying the presumption to a proof of claim “would complicate, bring uncertainty, and cause undue delay to the bankruptcy claims process. Setting a bright-line rule for the filing of claims is vital to the timely administration of a chapter 7 case.”
Even if the presumption applied, Judge James said the creditor would still lose. The clerk’s time stamp after the bar date overcame the presumption because it represented clear and convincing evidence that the claim arrived late.
Of perhaps no little significance, Judge James noted that the creditor’s affidavit of mailing was written four years after the claim was sent.
Judge James sustained the objection to the claim.
On an issue where the courts are divided, the so-called mailbox presumption will not deem a proof of claim to have been timely filed when the clerk time-stamps the claim after the bar date, according to Bankruptcy Judge Lena Mansori James of Winston Salem, N.C.
The bar date in a chapter 7 case was September 13. The clerk stamped the claim as filed on September 14, one day late.
The trustee objected to the claim as untimely. Citing the mailbox presumption, the creditor filed an affidavit stating that the creditor had mailed the claim on September 7.
Judge James said that the courts are split on whether the mailbox presumption applies to a proof of claim.