On November 28, 2016, Judge Laurie Selber Silverstein of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court ruled on a motion for relief from the automatic stay (we she treated as a motion for relief from the discharge injunction) in the Altegrity bankruptcy, Case No. 15-10226. The “Opinion” is available here. The Opinion was issued following legal argument and, by agreement of the parties, based only upon undisputed facts. Opinion at *1.
While various other arguments are addressed by Judge Silverstein, the primary issue within the Opinion boils down to two simple issues – (1) what is a “Claim” in bankruptcy, and (2) did all of the relief sought by the movant (who did not file a claim) constitute “Claims”. Opinion at *11.
In the Opinion, Judge Silverstein adopts the broad interpretation of a Claim that is routinely used, any “right to payment” constitutes a Claim. Holding that substantially all of the movant’s claims would be resolved through payment, and because the movant filed no claim in the bankruptcy case, Judge Silverstein denied the Motion in all respects but one – the movant can continue an existing suit to seek to obtain non-monetary relief, including the expungement of his commercial driving report (DAC Report).
A number of other interesting issues are briefly addressed in the Opinion, and I encourage you to follow the above link and read it for yourself. It is an easy 19-page read. I note that once again, the Delaware Bankruptcy Court continues to take an expansive view of “Claims” and would advise any party to a bankruptcy to take note of any claims bar date orders. If a cash payment *could* resolve your grievance with the Debtor, it would be wise to file a claim out of an abundance of caution.