Robert E. Grant Chief Judge, United States Bankruptcy Court
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
DECISION AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS TO CLAIMS
On November 08, 2018
The debtors have objected to proofs of claim filed by Purdue University, Navient Solutions, Inc., GLHEC & Affiliates and U.S. Department of Education, to which there has been no response. Despite the lack of any response, the objections must be overruled. See, In re Taylor, 289 B.R. 379, 384 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 2003) ("an objection to a proof of claim must allege facts which, if accepted as true, would trigger one of the statutory reasons for denying a claim. If it does not, the objection should not be sustained ... even if the creditor lacks sufficient interest to respond.").
Any consideration of the determination of claims must begin with § 502 of the Bankruptcy Code. Claims are deemed allowed unless objected to. 11 U.S.C. § 502(a). In the event of an objection, the court "shall" determine the amount due as of the date of the petition and allow the claim in that amount, unless one or more of nine statutory sets of circumstances are found to exist. 11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(1-9). Since the word "shall" operates as a command, the court cannot deny a claim for reasons other than those stated in §502(b). Taylor, 289 B.R. at 384.
Based upon the allegations in the objections, Mr. Stucky died during the pendency of this chapter 13 case. The essence of the objections is that he was the one liable for the debts in question; Mrs. Stucky is not; and so, the claims should be denied. While all that may be true, that is not one of the reasons for which claims are denied. Mr. Stucky is still a named debtor in this case; the case still involves him, his debts and his property. So long as he is a named party to the case, any treatment of claims should continue as if he were still alive. This is entirely consistent with the provisions of Rule 1016 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, addressing the effect of the debtor's death in a chapter 13 case. It provides that "the case may be dismissed; or if further administration is possible and in the best interest of the parties, the case may proceed and be concluded in the same manner, so far as possible, as though the death or incompetency had not occurred." Fed. R. Bankr. P. Rule 1016. See also, In re Shepherd, 490 B.R. 338 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 2013); In re Spiser, 232 B.R. 669, 673 (Bankr. N.D. Texas 1999) ("The term 'further administration' implies that the case would be carried to its normal conclusion with payments to the creditors as provided in the confirmed plan").
Debtors' objections to the claims filed by Purdue University, Navient Solutions, Inc., GLHEC & Affiliates and U.S. Department of Education are OVERRULED.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Robert E . Grant
Chief Judge, United States Bankruptcy Court