IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

IN RE: §

§

JUANITA GARZA, §

§

Debtor. §

______________________________ §

§

JUANITA GARZA, §

§

Appellant, §

§

VS. § NO. 4:05-CV-694-A

§

J.D. FOODS, INC., §

§

Appellee. §

MEMORANDUM OPINION

and

ORDER

This action comes before the court as an appeal from an

order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern

District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, the Honorable Dennis

Michael Lynn presiding. The court, having considered the briefs

of appellant, Juanita Garza ("the debtor"), and appellee, J.D.

Foods, Inc. ("J.D. Foods"), the record on appeal, and applicable

authorities, finds that the bankruptcy court's order should be

affirmed. 

I.

Jurisdiction

The appeal is from an order signed August 25, 2005, finding

that the motion for relief from stay filed by J.D. Foods

 

 Case 4:05-cv-00694-A Document 12-2 Filed 05/15/06 Page 1 of 5 PageID 51
2

constituted an informal proof of claim that was timely filed. 

This court's jurisdiction exists pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a).

II.

Underlying Proceedings

On July 28, 2004, the debtor filed a voluntary petition

under Chapter 13 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. On

September 2, 2004, J.D. Foods filed a motion for an order to lift

the bankruptcy stay so that it could liquidate its claim against

the debtor by obtaining a judgment in pending state-court

litigation. The debtor did not oppose the motion, and an order

lifting the stay was signed by Judge Lynn on September 8, 2004. 

Although the state court did enter judgment of $62,105.82

against the debtor, J.D. Foods failed timely to file a proof of

claim by the November 24, 2004, bar date. Consequently, on June

15, 2005, J.D. Foods filed a motion to allow its September 2,

2004, motion for relief from stay to constitute a timely filed

informal claim. At the hearing on J.D. Foods's motion, Judge

Lynn expressed concern over the policy implications of the

informal proof of claim doctrine. In light of existing Fifth

Circuit precedent acknowledging its continued existence, however,

Judge Lynn granted J.D. Foods's motion and, on August 25, 2005,

ordered that J.D. Foods's claim against the debtor be deemed

timely filed as an informal proof of claim. The debtor appeals

from that order.

III.

Issue on Appeal

 

 Case 4:05-cv-00694-A Document 12-2 Filed 05/15/06 Page 2 of 5 PageID 52
3

The sole issue on appeal is whether 11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(9),

as amended by the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1994, and Rules

3001(a), 3002(a), and 3002(c) of the Federal Bankruptcy Rules

abrogated the doctrine of informal proof of claims. 

IV.

Standard of Review

To the extent an appeal presents questions of law, which is

the only type of question presented here, the bankruptcy court's

judgment is subject to de novo review. Pierson & Gaylen v. Creel

& Atwood (In re Consolidated Bancshares, Inc.), 785 F.2d 1249,

1252 (5th Cir. 1986). 

V.

Analysis

The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1994 amended 11 U.S.C. §

502(b)(9) to require that proofs of claim be timely filed. See

11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(9) (amended 1994). Likewise, Rules 3001(a),

3001(b), and 3001(c) of the Federal Bankruptcy Rules, in addition

to providing that proofs of claim be timely filed, also require

that they conform substantially to an official form. The debtor

urges that 11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(9), as amended, together with Rules

3001(a), 3001(b), and 3001(c) have collectively done away with

the doctrine of informal proofs of claim. The court disagrees.

An informal proof of claim permits a bankruptcy court to

treat the pre-bar date filings of a creditor as an informal proof

 

 Case 4:05-cv-00694-A Document 12-2 Filed 05/15/06 Page 3 of 5 PageID 53
4

of claim that can be amended after the bar date to conform with,

inter alia, the requirements of Rule 3001(a) of the Federal Rules

of Bankruptcy Procedure. See, e.g., Barlow v. Waterman &

Associates, Inc. (In re Waterman & Associates, Inc.), 227 F.3d

604, 608 (6th Cir. 2000). The idea of informal proof of claims

has been in existence for nearly a century. Id. (citations

omitted).

 

Despite the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1994 and the amending

of 11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(9) to require that proofs of claim be

timely filed, the Fifth Circuit has continued to acknowledge the

viability of informal proof of claims. See Nikoloutsos v.

Nikoloutsos (In re Nikoloutsos), 199 F.3d 233, 236-237 (5th Cir.

1999). The debtor has failed to cite to any specific authority

to the contrary. Further, the debtor has failed to cite to any

specific authority holding that any Federal Rule of Bankruptcy

Procedure, whether singularly or in combination with 11 U.S.C. §

502(b)(9) as amended, has effectively abrogated informal proof of

claims. Consequently, the court concludes that the doctrine of

informal proof of claims is alive and well in this circuit. 

VI.

Order

For the reasons discussed herein,

The court ORDERS that the August 25, 2005, order from which

appeal is taken be, and is hereby, affirmed. 

 SIGNED May 15, 2006.

 

 Case 4:05-cv-00694-A Document 12-2 Filed 05/15/06 Page 4 of 5 PageID 54
5

 /s/ John McBryde 

JOHN McBRYDE

United States District Judge

 

 Case 4:05-cv-00694-A Document 12-2 Filed 05/15/06 Page 5 of 5 PageID 55