Pioneer Investment Services Co. v. Brunswick Associates Ltd. Partnership
- Decided
- March 24, 1993
- Docket
- 91-1695
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 5,239 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that a bankruptcy court abused its discretion in not finding excusable neglect where an experienced bankruptcy attorney failed to file a timely proof of claim — United States v. Whitehead (2008)
- holding that a party who failed to seek relief under Rule 60(b)(1) may not resort to subsection 6 more than one year after judgment. — Puckrein v. Jenkins (2005)
- recognizing that there are instances in which the Bankruptcy Rules bar relief from excusable neglect — In Re Savage (1994)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
Justice White delivered the opinion of the Court.
Rule 3003(c) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure sets out the requirements for filing proofs of claim in Chapter 9 Municipality and Chapter 11 Reorganization cases.[1] Rule 3003(c)(3) provides that the “court shall fix and for cause shown may extend the time within which proofs of claim or interest may be filed.” Rule 9006 is a general rule governing the computation, enlargement, and reduction of periods of time prescribed in other bankruptcy rules. Rule 9006(b)(1) empowers a bankruptcy court to permit a late filing if the movant’s failure to comply with an earlier deadline “was the result of excusable neglect.”[2] In this case, we are [*383] called upon to decide whether an attorney’s inadvertent failure to file a proof of claim within the deadline set by the court can constitute “excusable neglect” within the meaning of the Rule. Finding that it can, we affirm.
HH On April 12, 1989, petitioner filed a voluntary petition for bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee. The petition sought relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. Petitioner also filed a list of its 20 largest unsecured creditors, including all but one of respondents here. The following month, after obtaining extensions of time from the Bankruptcy Court, petitioner filed a statement of financial affairs and schedules of its assets and liabilities. The schedules, as amended, listed all of the respondents except Ft. Oglethorpe Associates Limited Partnership as creditors holding contingent, unliqui-dated, or disputed claims; the Ft. Oglethorpe partnership was not listed at all. Under § 1111 of the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U. S. C. § 1111(a), and Bankruptcy Rule 3003(c)(2), all such creditors are required to file a proof of claim with the bankruptcy court before the deadline, or “bar date,” established by the court.
Statutes cited
Cite this
Pioneer Investment Services Co. v. Brunswick Associates Ltd. Partnership, 507 U.S. 380 (1993)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.