Opinion
24-30527
12-19-2024
In re: DONNA J. STAKER, Debtor.
Chapter 13
ORDER DENYING OBJECTION TO PROOF OF CLAIM 2-1 OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (DOC. 70), WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Guy R. Humphrey United States Bankruptcy Judge
This matter is before the court on the Debtor's Objection to Proof of Claim No. 2 of U.S. Department of Education (Doc. 70) (the "Objection"), which was filed on November 13, 2024. This case was filed on March 22, 2024 as a Chapter 7 case. The Proof of Claim was filed on June 12, 2024 in the amount of $47,499.97 for a student loan debt. Claim 2-1. The case was converted to Chapter 13 on September 20, 2024 through an agreed order. Doc. 50. The Debtor is proposing to pay 100% to all unsecured creditors under her Chapter 13 plan. See docs. 55 (proposed plan), 80 (agreed order between the Debtor and the Chapter 13 Trustee).
Payment of the principal amount of the student loan, which currently appears to be a non-dischargeable debt, may not eliminate the Debtor's full obligation to the creditor when the Chapter 13 plan is completed. Uber v. Nelnet, Inc. (In re Uber), 443 B.R. 500, 505-06 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 2011) (describing how contractual interest and other costs provided by a student loan agreement may still accumulate during a Chapter 13 case).
The basis for the Debtor's Objection is the statement that the "amount claimed is inaccurate, as payments have been made . . . since the claim was filed on June 12, 2024." Although no response has been filed by the creditor, the Debtor's Objection must be denied.
First, the amount of a claim is determined as of the bankruptcy petition date. In re Karsten Gering, LLC, No. BK15-40935, 2015 Bankr. LEXIS 4095, at *9-11 (Bankr. D. Neb. Dec. 4, 2015); In re Travers, 635 B.R. 273, 278-79 (Bankr. D. S.C. 2021); In re Elzey, No. 05-11173, 2009 Bankr. LEXIS 2536, at *7-8 (Bankr. E.D. La. July 2, 2009). If an objection to a proof of claim is filed, the court "shall determine the amount of such claim . . . as of the date of the filing of the petition . . ." 11 U.S.C. § 502(b). A post-petition event does not serve as a basis to disallow a proof of claim. In re Sears, 536 B.R. 286, 307 (D. Neb. 2015); Karsten at *11; Bononi v. Bayer Employees Fed. Credit Union (In re Zilka), 407 B.R. 684, 692 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2009). Accordingly, post-petition payments to the creditor do not serve as a basis to disallow the proof of claim.
Second, the asserted basis for denying the claim fails to provide sufficient information for the court to disallow the claim in its entirety. As noted, the Debtor appears to be seeking to disallow the entire claim because of post-petition payments, and the balance of the proof of claim needing adjustment to account for such payments. Even assuming for argument that the Debtor can object to this proof of claim on that basis under 11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(1), the Objection provides no specific information as to what the Debtor believes is the current balance owed. In any event, it provides no basis to disallow the entire proof of claim.
For the foregoing reasons, the Debtor's Objection (Doc. 70) is denied, without prejudice.
Of course, this order is without prejudice to Debtor counsel and the local U.S. Attorney's office conferring in an attempt to see if the parties can agree on an appropriate amended proof of claim to be paid in this Chapter case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.