X hits on this document

PDF document

04-16614-frm_Margaret%20M%20Thompson_2006-09-12%2010;05;01.pdf - page 12 / 14

41 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

12 / 14

claims that could have supported denial of discharge filing were barred by res judicata); See also

Vahlsing, 829 F2d 565, 567 (5th Cir. 1987)(Pre-petition creditor who had claim adjudicated and

dismissed in state court lost creditor status); But see, Horizon Financial F.A. v. Gresham (In re

Gresham), 95 B.R. 836 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1988)(reaching merits of debtor’s objection to creditor’s

claim and finding creditor lacked standing).

Kentor’s claim, however, is not barred by res judicata or the statute of limitations, and the

divorce court did not resolve the contribution claim in connection with the Meredith Loan. The

Horizon court is in the minority with respect to determining the merits of the claim prior to the issue

of

standing.

This

Bankruptcy

Court

nor

any

state

court

has

yet

to

adjudicate

the

allowance/disallowance of Kentor’s contribution claim. Further, the majority of the court’s

addressing this issue have determined that any such adjudication should not affect the issue of

standing. This Court agrees.

Kentor is a “creditor” of Dr. Thompson because he had a contingent claim for contribution

on the petition date against Dr. Thompson. He was liable and could be called upon in the future to

pay the same. The Divorce Decree did nothing to alter the parties’ positions. The question of this

claim’s enforceability against the bankruptcy estate arose after the filing of the bankruptcy case and

not before. Further, we cannot predict the future. If Kentor is successful in this case and Dr.

Thompson does not receive a discharge, he may then be called upon to pay the Meredith Loan in full

and have a right to contribution which would be enforceable presuming the good doctor is then

solvent. Chalk v. Collier, 208 S.W. 972 (Tex. Civ. App.–Amarillo 1919 writ ref’d)(The insolvent

remains liable to those paying and may be compelled to pay them if he or she becomes able). Who

knows. Crazier things have happened. But, the point is that Kentor held that contingent claim on

the petition date. And that is enough for standing. Whether it will ever be non-contingent or

12

Document info
Document views41
Page views41
Page last viewedThu Dec 08 22:55:01 UTC 2016
Pages14
Paragraphs325
Words4370

Comments