11 U.S.C. § 101

Section 101(5)(A) defines a claim broadly enough to include an unliquidated claim for trustee or professional fees before the court awards those fees.

Walton v. Kleinfeld (In re Glados, Inc.) · filed 1995-05-05(5)(A)

To hold that administrative claimants do not possess a “claim” capable of accruing interest until it is liquidated by a court order approving fees would needlessly limit the meaning of the term “claim.”

Section 101(5) includes contingent and unmatured claims; contamination claims can fall within its definition even when the damage was not visible at the surface.

Texaco Inc. v. Sanders (In Re Texaco Inc.) · filed 1995-05-15(5)

Accordingly, I reject Respondents’ argument insofar as it is based on the assertion that their claims were “unmanifested” at the surface. The claims in question were fully matured and uncontingent. They were “provable” even under the Bankruptcy Act, and are clearly within the broader Bankruptcy Code definition of “claims,” which includes both contingent and unmatured claims.

Section 101(5) includes a right to payment in the definition of a claim regardless of how the creditor can enforce it.

Thompson v. Board of Trustees (In Re Thompson) · filed 1995-05-23(5)

Under the plain language of the Code, the term “claim” includes any “right to payment” regardless of the enforcement mechanism available to the creditor.

Section 101(12) defines debt as liability on a claim, including a disputed claim.

In the Matter of Frank E. KNIGHT, Debtor-Appellant · filed 1995-05-03(12)

In fight of the virtual synonymy of “debt” and “claim,” therefore, we conclude that a disputed claim is a debt to be included when calculating the § 109(e) requirements.

Section 101(10) treats an assignee owed payments under a debtor’s sales contract as a creditor when the claim arose before bankruptcy.

McLaughlin v. Security Pacific Housing Services (In Re McLaughlin) · filed 1995-05-23(10)

The transfer was to SPHS, which by then was a creditor of McLaughlin ... on account of an antecedent debt.

Section 101(5)(A) includes a contractual right to attorney’s fees as a prepetition claim even when the right is contingent and the attorney’s work occurs after the petition is filed.

In Re Keaton · filed 1995-06-01(5)(A)

However, the definition is relevant to determine whether Boatmen’s had a right to payment at the time the petition was filed even though the right was contingent, unliquidated, or unma-tured at that moment. ... While the representation may have been performed after the petition was filed, Boatmen’s right to collect attorney’s fees arose out of the contract and is a prepetition claim.

Section 101(5) includes a statutory right to levy on a debtor’s assets as a claim even if the debtor is not personally liable.

In Re Hurricane R v. Park, Inc. · filed 1995-06-18(5)

Accordingly, the statutory right to levy upon assets is a claim within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 101(5) even if a debtor is not personally liable on the obligation.

Section 101(4)(A) includes a contingent right to payment in the definition of a claim, even before the creditor learns of it.

Algernon L. Butler, Jr., Trustee in Bankruptcy for Cheryl Lynn Harper v. Nationsbank, N.A. (Formerly Ncnb National Bank · filed 1995-07-05(4)(A)

However, the Bankruptcy Code clearly states that even a contingent right to payment constitutes a “claim.” ... Therefore, NationsBank had a claim as soon as James deposited the fraudulently endorsed check into the Bank, the recovery of which was contingent upon the receipt of notice of the forgery.

Section 101(5) treats an underlying right to recover overpayments as a claim even when the creditor seeks recovery through recoupment.

Kings Terrace Nursing Home & Health Related Facility v. New York State Department of Social Services (In Re Kings Terrac · filed 1995-07-10(5)

Given that there can be no right to recoupment unless the party claiming recoupment has some underlying right to recover, directly or indirectly, against the party from whom recoupment is sought, an alleged right to recoupment unquestionably is a “claim” within the meaning of the Code.

Section 101(5) requires a right to payment under applicable state law for a debt to qualify as a bankruptcy claim.

Matter of Plunkett · filed 1995-07-11(5)

Absent some right to payment, there can be no “claim” within the purview of the Bankruptcy Code and, hence, no recovery, either by way of an informal proof of claim, an amended proof of claim, or otherwise. Whether a right to payment exists is determined by reference to state law, which creates enforceable rights and substantive obligations.

A mortgage lien on a Chapter 11 debtor’s property is a claim under § 101(5) even if the debtor was not the original obligor.

Matter of Foxcroft Square Co. · filed 1995-07-17(5)

The Debtors may not have been the original obligors with respect to the loan at bar, however, as noted above, FNMA has a “claim” on property owned by the Debtors under the Supreme Court’s broad interpretation of the general provisions of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 101(12) defines a debt as liability on a claim; a debtor incurs a debt when legally obligated to pay it.

Southmark v. Marley · filed 1995-06-26(12)

The Code defines "debt" as "liability on a claim." 11 U.S.C. § 101(12) (1988). A debtor incurs a debt when he becomes legally obligated to pay it.

A lender is not a creditor under § 101(10) and (5) when it has no right to payment from the debtor or qualifying claim against the debtor’s property.

In Re Wright · filed 1995-06-29(10), (5)

It therefore follows that MAGNA is not a creditor under §§ 101(10) and (5) because it has neither a right to payment from the Debtor nor a “claim against property of the debtor” as that term was intended to be applied.

Section 101(10) includes an entity with a contingent claim within the definition of creditor.

In Re PA Bergner & Co. Holding Co. · filed 1995-07-28(10)

The bank was at least a contingent creditor before it paid AMC, which satisfies the definition of "creditor" under the Bankruptcy Code. 11 U.S.C. § 101(10); see also 11 U.S.C. §§ 101(5), (12); Matter of Milwaukee Cheese, 164 B.R. 297, 305 (Bankr. E.D.Wis.1993).

Section 101(10) includes an entity entitled to payment, even one with a contingent claim, in its definition of creditor.

Bergner v. Bank One, Milwaukee, N.A. (In re Bergner) · filed 1995-07-28(10)

If an entity is entitled to payment, how can that entity not be a creditor under the Bankruptcy Code’s expansive definition? Obviously, an entity entitled to payment is a creditor. 11 U.S.C. § 101(10).

Section 101(10) defines a creditor as one who holds a pre-petition claim against the debtor.

Arrow Mill Development Corp. v. ShopRite of Clinton (In Re Arrow Mill Development Corp.) · filed 1995-08-11(10)

Section 544 is inapplicable because ShopRite is not a creditor asserting its interest against the debtor’s property. In the bankruptcy context, a creditor is one who holds a pre-petition claim against the debtor. 11 U.S.C. § 101(10).

A contingent right to payment is a claim, so a guarantor’s contingent obligation can be a debt before the guarantor pays.

Alfa Mutual Fire Insurance v. Memory (In Re Martin) · filed 1995-08-02(5)(A)

A claim is defined under the Bankruptcy Code as a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A). ... Alfa could have asserted a claim against Martin for repayment of the loan upon C & C’s default because Martin incurred a contingent obligation to pay the debt when he signed the promissory note and mortgage as guarantor on April 6, 1988.

An entity loses creditor status when its right to payment becomes entirely unenforceable under applicable law.

Putnam County Savings Bank v. Bagen (In Re Bagen) · filed 1995-08-07(10)(A)

In my view, once an obligation is entirely unenforceable under applicable law, creditor status in bankruptcy is lost.

Section 101(12) defines a debt as liability on a claim; a debtor incurs a debt when legally obligated to pay it.

Southmark v. Marley · filed 1995-08-09(12)

The Code defines "debt" as "liability on a claim." 11 U.S.C. § 101(12) (1988). A debtor incurs a debt when he becomes legally obligated to pay it.

Section 101(5) treats an unmatured right to payment under a contract as a claim in bankruptcy.

In Re Stewart Foods, Inc. · filed 1995-08-24(5)

Broecker's claim is not defeated simply because his right to the individual payments had not yet become due as of the date of the bankruptcy filing. The definition of "claim" in 11 U.S.C. Sec. 101(5) specifically provides that an unmatured right to payment is a claim.

Section 101(5) treats allegations seeking patent infringement damages and an injunction as a claim.

Pasteur v. Cambridge Biotech Corp. (In Re Cambridge Biotech Corp.) · filed 1995-09-01(5)

The Code defines “claim” as encompassing both the right to payment and the right to an equitable remedy for breach of performance if such breach gives rise to a right to payment. 11 U.S.C. § 101(5) (1988). The plaintiffs seek damages and an injunction. As I have previously ruled, the allegations contained in the complaint give rise to a “claim” within the meaning of the Code.

Section 101(5) includes a mortgage claim against property a debtor inherited, even when the debtor has no personal liability for the debt.

Matter of Hutcherson · filed 1995-09-22(5)

To the extent that those cases contradict the reasoning of Johnson, the Court therefore must conclude that they no longer present an accurate interpretation of section 101(5)’s reference to “claim.” Thus, although factually analogous, these cases will not sway the Court from its ultimate conclusion that First National does indeed hold a “claim” against the Debtor’s estate.

Section 101 treats a right to payment as a claim even before payment is due; a debt arises when the debtor’s liability accrues.

Jones Truck Lines, Inc. v. Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund (In Re Jones Truck Lines, Inc.) · filed 1995-09-27(5)(A)

The Bankruptcy Code defines a “debt” as a “liability on a claim.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(12) (1994). A claim is defined as a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliqui-dated, fixed, contingent, matured, unma-tured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A) (1994). Under this broad definition, Central States acquired a claim against Jones as soon as the liability accrued under the national master freight agreement.

Section 101(5) defines a claim to include a right to payment; a recapture right reducible to money can therefore be a claim.

WBQ Partnership v. Commonwealth Department of Medical Assistance Services (In Re WBQ Partnership) · filed 1995-10-03(5)

The Bankruptcy Code defines “claim” as a “right to payment” — something that can be satisfied with money. ... Accordingly, we conclude that DMAS’s interest can be reduced to a claim, and is therefore subject to a hypothetical money satisfaction under 11 U.S.C. § 363(f)(5).

Section 101(10)(A) defines a creditor to include an entity with a claim against the debtor.

Pullman Construction Industries, Inc. v. United States (In Re Pullman Construction Industries, Inc.) · filed 1995-08-30(10)(A)

The United States was therefore a “creditor” of Pullman within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 101(10)(A) (1995), and the payments made by Pullman to the IRS were made “to or for the benefit of a creditor” as required by 11 U.S.C. § 547(b)(1) (1995).

A bondholder’s right to payment through taxes levied on a debtor’s property can qualify as a claim under § 101(5).

Stayner v. Village of Sugar Grove (In Re Stayner) · filed 1995-08-30(5)

First and foremost, despite Movants’ steadfast refusal to characterize themselves as “creditors,” they may hold identifiable “claims” against Debtors’ estate. The Bankruptcy Code defines “claim” broadly as including a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured[.]” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5) (1995). The bondholders hold rights to payment that, pursuant to Illinois law and the four bond ordinances pleaded in the Complaint, can be satisfied solely by taxes levied on property within the special services area.

Section 101(12) defines debt as liability on a claim; a debtor incurs a debt when it becomes legally obligated to pay.

In the Matter of Southmark Corporation, Debtor. Southmark Corporation v. Marley · filed 1995-08-30(12)

The Code defines “debt” as “liability on a claim.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(12) (1988). A debtor incurs a debt when he becomes legally obligated to pay it.

Section 101 defines a debt as liability on a claim and defines a claim broadly enough to include a prepetition marital property obligation reduced to judgment after the bankruptcy filing.

Rul-Lan v. Rul-Lan (In Re Rul-Lan) · filed 1995-09-07(5)(A), (12)

The Code defines a “debt” to be a “liability on a claim”. 11 U.S.C. § 101(12). A “claim” is “[a] right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, un-liquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unma-tured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A). ... Dr. Rul-lan’s obligation to pay Mrs. Rul-lan $51,000.00 is a debt which arose before the Order for Relief.

Section 101’s definitions of debt and claim apply in Chapter 9 and encompass a municipality’s unperformed contractual obligations.

In Re City of Colorado Springs Spring Creek General Improvement District · filed 1995-09-29(5), (12)

Because no contrary definition for “debt” is apparent in Chapter 9, I conclude that the standard definition found in § 101 applies. ... From a technical perspective, the District’s unperformed obligations under the Trust Agreement give rise to claims.

Section 101 treats an unconditional obligation to pay as a debt even when installments are due after the bankruptcy petition.

In Re Dak Industries, Incorporated · filed 1995-10-02(4), (11)

The bankruptcy code defines "debt" as liability on a "claim." 11 U.S.C. Sec. 101(11). It defines a "claim" in part as the "right to payment, whether or not such right is ... contingent, matured, [or] unmatured...." 11 U.S.C. Sec. 101(4). The agreement here provided that upon signing, DAK was absolutely obligated to pay $2,750,000, even if it sold only one copy of Word. The fact that some of the payments became due postpetition does not alter the fact that the entire debt was absolutely owed prepetition, and was therefore prepetition debt.

Section 101(10) includes a co-guarantor as a creditor when the co-guarantor has a contingent right of contribution, even before making a payment.

DG Creditor Corp. v. American Express Bank Ltd. (In Re DG Creditor Corp.) · filed 1995-09-15(10)

A creditor is an “entity that has a claim against the debtor that arose at the time of or before the order for relief concerning the debtor.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(10). ... As the Trustee points out, whether one is a creditor within the meaning of the Bankruptcy Code does not depend on whether one holds a net claim against the debtor. Indeed, section 502(e)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code expressly recognizes the possibility of duplicate claims of contribution. ... The Dabahs were creditors of each other at the relevant time.

Section 101 treats an unconditional obligation as a debt when it arises, even if payments are not due until after the bankruptcy petition.

Microsoft Corp. v. DAK Industries, Inc. (In re DAK Industries, Inc.) · filed 1995-10-02(4), (11)

The bankruptcy code defines “debt” as liability on a “claim.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(11). It defines a “claim” in part as the “right to payment, whether or not such right is ... contingent, matured, [or] unmatured....” 11 U.S.C. § 101(4). The agreement here provided that upon signing, DAK was absolutely obligated to pay $2,750,-000, even if it sold only one copy of Word. The fact that some of the payments became due postpetition does not alter the fact that the entire debt was absolutely owed prepetition, and was therefore prepetition debt.

Section 101(5) defines a judgment lien as a claim because the lienholder retains a right to payment from the property or a right to foreclose.

Derrick v. Richard L. Grafe Commodities, Inc. (In Re Derrick) · filed 1995-10-13(5)

While Johnson dealt with a mortgage rather than a judgment lien, it relied upon the definition of “claim” found in 11 U.S.C. § 101(5), which provides that a “claim” is a “right to payment” or a “right to an equitable remedy for breach of performance.” ... By the same definition, a judgment lien is a claim.

Section 101(5)'s definition of claim includes a bank's right to repayment for provisional credit extended on deposited checks, even if the depositor does not use the credit.

Laws v. United Missouri Bank of Kansas City, NA · filed 1995-10-13(5)

The Bankruptcy Code treats “debt” as the converse of a “claim.” ... Consequently, for purposes of the Bankruptcy Code, if UMB had a claim against KBDC, KBDC owed a debt to UMB. ... Because credit is extended by the bank prior to final settlement, however, the bank has a claim against the depositor (and the depositor has a debt to the bank) in the amount of the provisional credit extended, regardless of whether the depositor makes use of this credit.

Section 101(5) does not treat recoupment as a claim because recoupment only reduces a debt rather than creating an independent right to payment.

Oregon Ex Rel. SAIF Corp. v. Harmon (In Re Harmon) · filed 1995-10-25(5)

Because recoupment only reduces a debt as opposed to constituting an independent basis for a debt, it is not a claim in bankruptcy, and is therefore unaffected by the debtor’s discharge.

Section 101(5) does not limit claims to past-due obligations; a vendor with a current account can hold a claim.

In Re Atlas MacH. and Iron Works, Inc. · filed 1995-11-30(5)

The Court is not convinced that Ms. Laver, Mr. Stoudt and Mr. Hibey each independently believed that the definition of “creditor” or “eligible creditor” included only those vendors with a past due account. Additionally, we cannot even consider that such a definition was a “good faith extension of the law” considering that they failed to cite any authority for such a proposition, ignored the clear language of § 101(5) and did not even attempt to distinguish the well settled case law on the issue.

Section 101(5)’s definition of a claim does not include a former spouse’s ownership interest in a military pension that is marital property.

Walston v. Walston · filed 1995-12-13(5)

As a matter of law, Ms. Walston has a marital property right in the pension, and this right is not held in the nature of a creditor’s claim against appellee’s estate as defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(5).

Section 101 defines a debt, read together with the definition of a claim, as an obligation capable of enforcement against the debtor.

Morgan v. Musgrove (In Re Musgrove) · filed 1995-10-18(5), (12)

Thus, reading sections 101(12) and 101(5) coextensively, the term “debt” refers to any obligation capable of enforcement against the debtor.

A civil penalty is a debt when it gives rise to a right to payment, even if the judgment imposing it were void.

Federal Trade Commission v. Wright (In Re Wright) · filed 1995-10-25(5), (12)

Yet, even assuming that it were void, that fact is of no consequence to the issue of whether a "debt” — defined by 11 U.S.C. § 101(12) as “liability on a claim"- — exists. A “claim” is a "right to payment” which need not be "reduced to judgment”. 11 U.S.C. § 101(5).

Section 101(10) defines a creditor as an entity with a claim that arose by the order for relief; a later claim does not make its holder a creditor at the time of filing.

In re the Marriage of Ray · filed 1995-10-27(10)

If an entity does not have an enforceable claim against a debtor at the time a bankruptcy is filed, that entity is not and cannot be a creditor. Robert’s claim as a creditor under the hold harmless clause of the property settlement agreement did not arise until nearly 10 months after Tresia filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy. At the time the Chapter 13 order was entered, Robert was not a creditor of Tresia as regards any claim under the parties’ settlement agreement.

Under Section 101’s definitions of claim and debt, the timing of the alleged criminal offense determines whether a restitution obligation is a prepetition or postpetition debt.

In Re McMullen · filed 1995-11-09(5)(A), (12)

Moesel notwithstanding, however, I believe it is the timing of the debtor’s alleged criminal offense which dictates whether the corresponding restitution obligation is a pre- or post-petition debt.

Section 101(5) includes a contractual cause of action against a debtor within the definition of a claim.

Tarrant v. City of Douglas (In Re Tarrant) · filed 1995-11-13(5)

This agreement provided the City with a contractual cause of action against Debtor independent of its shared use policy. This cause of action is a claim within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 101(5), and the City does not dispute that it terminated Debtor’s service and refused to reinstate such service in an effort to collect the debt evidenced by the agreement.

A right to repayment can be a claim under § 101(5)(A) even without a specified payment time or condition.

In re Wabash Valley Power Ass'n · filed 1995-12-28(5)(A)

Thus the fact that the patronage capital accounts are not payable at a specified time or under specified conditions does not foreclose their treatment as claims for bankruptcy purposes.

Section 101(5)(A) includes a state agency’s statutory right to additional unemployment contributions within the definition of a claim.

unempl.ins.rep. (Cch) P 22,142 in Re Hollytex Carpet Mills, Inc., Debtor. Hollytex Carpet Mills, Inc. v. Oklahoma Employ · filed 1996-01-09(5)(A)

Applying the above-stated analysis to the instant case, the right of Defendant to receive payment of additional unemployment contributions as provided by the application of section 3-107 of the OESA to Plaintiffs case is a Seventh priority “claim” against Plaintiffs Chapter 11 bankruptcy estate and also a “debt” of Plaintiff under sections 101(5)(A), 101(12), and 507(a)(7)(D) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 101(5) defines a claim as a right to payment, which includes an administrative expense.

Matter of Best Refrigerated Express, Inc. · filed 1996-01-31(5)

11 U.S.C. § 101(5) defines claims as a “right to payment.” Administrative expenses are a right to payment. Therefore, to the extent a distinction between the terms “claims” and “expenses” has been made under the Bankruptcy Code, it appears that the Code uses such distinctive language merely to clarify that administrative expenses are a different type of claim from a prepetition claim.

Section 101(5)(A) treats a right to payment under a prepetition agreement for postpetition attorney’s fees as a claim.

Hessinger & Associates v. Voglio (In Re Voglio) · filed 1996-01-17(5)(A)

11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A) defines a “claim” for purposes of bankruptcy as “a right to payment whether or not such a right to payment is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliqui-dated, fixed, contingent, matured, unma-tured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured or unsecured_” 11 U.S.C. § 101(11) defines debt as “liability on a claim.” ... The prepetition agreement between Hes-singer and Associates and the Voglios gives rise to a debt for payment of attorney’s fees.

A debt under § 101(12) can include contractual interest, attorney fees, and collection costs in addition to loan principal.

Schirmer v. Minnesota Higher Education Coordinating Board (In Re Schirmer) · filed 1996-01-24(12)

Clearly, the “right to payment” that constitutes a “debt” cognizable in bankruptcy is broader than just the principal amount of any pre-petition advance of credit; it can also include such ancillary contractual entitlements as interest, attorney fees, and costs of collection.

Section 101(12) defines a debt as liability on a claim; postfiling interest excluded from an insolvent debtor’s claim is therefore not a debt preserved by the discharge exception.

In Re Heisson · filed 1996-02-15(12)

Second, section 1141(d)(2) refers to a “debt” excepted from discharge under section 523, which also refers to a “debt.” A “debt” is defined to mean “liability on a claim” 11 U.S.C. § 101(12) (1988 & Supp. V 1993). Where, as here, the debtor is insolvent, a “claim” does not include postfiling interest. 11 U.S.C. §§ 502(b)(2), 726(a) (1988).

Section 101(10)(A) defines a creditor as an entity with a claim against the debtor; a disputed claim can qualify with minimal proof.

In re Bay Area Material Handling, Inc. · filed 1996-01-25(10)(A)

A "creditor" is an "entity that has a claim against the debtor[.]" 11 U.S.C. § 101(10)(A). Courts have held that a putative creditor may not be denied standing to seek conversion simply because its claim is disputed, Johnston, 149 B.R. at 160-61, and require only minimal proof of a claim. Id. Given Yale's substantial documentation of its claim, it may still be a creditor, and therefore has standing in this appeal.

Section 101(10)'s definition of creditor includes entities with secured claims and entities with unsecured claims.

In Re Ford · filed 1996-02-14(10)

This definition is broad enough to encompass both creditors with secured claims and creditors with unsecured claims.

Section 101(10) includes a person with a claim against the debtor as a creditor, even when the claim arose from fraud.

In Re Dow Corning Corp. · filed 1996-02-15(10)

Someone can become a "creditor” as a result of the "debtor's” fraudulent conduct. In bankruptcy, anyone with a claim against the debtor is a "creditor.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(10).

Section 101’s definitions of claim and debt include unmatured payment obligations, allowing future spousal support obligations to count as antecedent debt.

In Re Robert J. FUTORAN, Debtor. Robert J. FUTORAN, Appellant, v. Max H. RUSH, Trustee in Bankruptcy, Appellee · filed 1996-01-26(4), (11)

“Debt” is defined as “liability on a claim.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(11). “Claim is defined as “right to payment, whether or not such right is ... liquidated, unliquidated, ... matured, unmatured, disputed [or] undisputed. ...” 11 U.S.C. § 101(4). Thus, even Debtor’s unmatured child support obligations may be considered an antecedent debt. ... Cases that have considered the application § 547(b)(2) to the future obligations under an installment loan support this interpretation. ... Although unmatured, the husband’s future spousal support obligations were antecedent debt.

Section 101(5) does not make a former spouse’s right to pension benefits a claim against the debtor when the right to payment runs against the pension plan.

Gendreau v. Gendreau (In Re Gendreau) · filed 1996-01-31(5)

The Appellee's claim is against United, not the Debtor. Accordingly, there is no claim subject to discharge in bankruptcy.

State agencies with separate claims may be treated as separate creditors.

McConahey v. United States (In Re McConahey) · filed 1996-02-16(27)

However, under the Bankruptcy Code definition of “creditor,” each of these state agencies was a separate creditor.

Section 101(5) includes a contingent claim arising from a debtor’s prepetition act or omission when the claimant had a relationship to that act or omission, even if the harm had not yet appeared.

In Re Russell · filed 1996-02-28(5)

After review of the foregoing authorities, and others, this Court concludes that where debtor committed the act or omission complained of prior to filing bankruptcy, and the claimant has a relationship to the act or omission at the time, such as being the patient or a contracting party, the claim arose at that point in time even if there has been no indication or manifestation of the consequences of the act or omission. It is within the fair contemplation of parties entering into a contract that the other party may breach it, or have made misrepresentations to induce the making of the contract. Thus, a contingent claim arises at that point in time, although it may never mature. The policies of the Bankruptcy Code are best served by an inclusive interpretation of “claim”, as 11 U.S.C. § 101(5) contemplates.

Section 101(5)(A) includes a right to payment under a money judgment within the definition of a claim.

In Re Shoen · filed 1996-03-04(5)(A)

The Share Case Judgment gave the Share Case Plaintiffs a “right to payment” for their damages, which is clearly a “claim” under Bankruptcy Code § 101(5)(A).

Section 101(5)(A) includes an unmatured or contingent discrimination claim even when the claimant has not yet received a right to sue letter.

McSherry v. TWA · filed 1996-03-07(5)(A)

It is clear that the definition of “claim,” as stated in the Code, is broad enough to encompass an obligation on which a civil action would be premature because jurisdictional prerequisites have not been met.

Section 101(5)(A) includes a right to payment as a claim even when a right to sue letter has not issued and a civil suit would be premature.

McSherry v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. · filed 1996-03-07(5)(A)

It is clear that the definition of “claim,” as stated in the Code, is broad enough to encompass an obligation on which a civil action would be premature because jurisdictional prerequisites have not been met.

Section 101(4) requires a right to payment for a creditor to have a claim; failure to enforce a contractual provision does not itself establish that right.

Continental Securities Corp. v. Shenandoah Nursing Home Partnership · filed 1996-03-08(4)

However, this language simply states the obvious — that if a creditor has a right to payment, it has a “claim” under Chapter 11. But the creditor must, of course, first show that it has a “right to payment” in order to have a “claim.” Continental cites no case law for its proposition that the bankruptcy court’s failure to enforce the lockout provision of the Note gives rise to an independent “right to payment.”

Section 101(5) defines claim broadly enough to include contingent or unmatured obligations arising from a prebankruptcy agreement.

Wolkowitz v. Shearson Lehman Bros. (In Re Weisberg) · filed 1996-03-14(5)

The agreement entered into prior to bankruptcy created mutual obligations which fall well within the broad definition relating to claims in the Bankruptcy Code. Section 101(11) defines “a debt” as a “liability on a claim.” Section 101(5) defines “claim” as: ... Thus, the definition of “claim” is extremely broad, covering claims of a contingent or unmatured nature.

Section 101(5)(A) treats a right to payment as a claim even when payment has no specified time or condition.

In the Matter of Wabash Valley Power Association, Inc. · filed 1996-03-20(5)(A)

The definition of "claim" under the bankruptcy code is very broad, encompassing any "right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured." 11 U.S.C. Sec. 101(5)(A). Thus the fact that the patronage capital accounts are not payable at a specified time or under specified conditions does not foreclose their treatment as claims for bankruptcy purposes.

Section 101(5)(A) defines a claim as a right to payment; an amount already paid to the creditor is not a claim.

Weiss v. United States (In re Weiss) · filed 1996-04-12(5)(A)

The IRS does not have a “right to payment” for $612.00 from Weiss, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 101(5), and, therefore, that amount should not be allowed as an unsecured claim.

Section 101(12) defines a debt as liability on a claim, which can include potential CERCLA liability.

LTV Steel Co. v. Union Carbide Corp. (In Re Chateaugay Corp.) · filed 1996-03-18(12)

The proceeding indisputably concerns dischargeability, and the claim asserted falls within the statutory meaning of a “debt.”

Section 101’s definitions of “claim” and “creditor” do not make an attorney, agent, or proxy a claim holder merely by representing a creditor.

In Re Dow Corning Corp. · filed 1996-03-21(5), (10)

Now, § 1102 speaks only of persons holding “claims” being appointed to a committee, and the definitions of “creditor” (§ 101(10)) and “claim” (§ 101(5)) leave no room for an “authorized agent, attorney or proxy” to fit.

Section 101(5)(A) includes contingent, unliquidated rights to future payment within the definition of a bankruptcy claim.

UMWA 1992 Benefit Plan v. Leckie Smokeless Coal Co. · filed 1996-04-16(5)(A)

Thus, under the broad definition of “claim” as it is defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A), Defendants’ liability for premiums is in the nature of a “claim” as well as being Plaintiffs’ “interest in property.”

Section 101(5)(A) treats an unpaid obligation under a prepetition attorney fee agreement as a claim, even when payment is scheduled after filing.

In Re Martin · filed 1996-04-24(5)(A)

The reasoning in these cases is that the pre-petition fee agreement gives ... rise to a debt which, if unpaid at the time of the bankruptcy filing, falls within the definition of a claim pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A). ... This Court is persuaded by the analysis in Hessinger, Voglio, Biggar and Symes and respectfully disagrees with Mills.

Section 101(5)(B) treats an injunction enforcing a covenant not to compete as a claim when the same breach gives the creditor an alternative right to damages for future competition.

Maids International, Inc. v. Ward (In Re Ward) · filed 1996-04-16(5)(B)

Hence, under the definition, Maids’ injunctive rights constitute a claim.

Section 101(5)(B) includes a right to an equitable remedy for breach of performance within the definition of a claim when the breach gives rise to a right to payment.

In Re Lady H Coal Co., Inc. · filed 1996-04-23(5)(B)

As amply demonstrated in Judge Pearson’s proposed disposition, the breadth of § 363(f) and § 101(5)(B) is sufficient to block the imposition on the buyer of any liability for Debtors’ obligations under the collective bargaining agreement.

A right to damages for breach of a personal service contract is a claim under § 101(5), and the resulting liability is a debt under § 101(12).

All Blacks B v. v. Gruntruck · filed 1996-05-09(5), (12)

As Gruntruck contends in its pleadings, ABR could pursue payment for damages as a remedy for Gruntruck’s breach, which would qualify ABR’s right to relief as a “claim.” ... Thus, the court affirms the Bankruptcy Court ruling on this point.

Section 101(12)’s definition of debt excludes a former spouse’s share of military retirement benefits awarded by a divorce decree or other court order.

Williams v. Califf (In Re Califf) · filed 1996-05-10(12)

Disposable military retirement benefits are not debts as defined by 11 U.S.C. § 101(12) of the Bankruptcy Code, but rather, constitute the sole and separate property of a debtor’s former spouse where the spouse received an award of a portion of debtor’s military retirement benefits pursuant to a divorce decree or other order of court.

Section 101(12) defines debt as liability on a claim; an unenforceable demand for Ponzi scheme returns creates no debt.

Sender v. Buchanan (In Re Hedged-Investments Associates, Inc.) · filed 1996-05-23(12)

Because she had no claim against HIA Inc. for damages in excess of her original investment, HIA Inc. had no debt to her for those amounts.

Section 101(5)(A) includes contingent rights to payment as claims; a guarantor can acquire a contingent claim against the debtor when it signs a guaranty.

Jones Truck Lines, Inc. v. Target Stores (In Re Jones Truck Lines, Inc.) · filed 1996-05-21(5)(A)

A claim is defined as a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A) (1994). When Target signed the guaranty it immediately incurred a contingent direct liability to Standard and gained a contingent claim against Jones in the event Target paid on the guaranty.

Section 101’s definitions of creditor, entity, and governmental unit do not require federal agencies to be treated as separate creditors for bankruptcy setoff.

Turner v. Small Business Administration · filed 1996-05-23(10), (15), (27)

It is true that the Bankruptcy Code does recognize a difference between the United States and an agency of the United States government, but this in no way demonstrates an intent to erode the right of administrative offset that exists outside of bankruptcy.

A limited partner’s equity interest alone does not make the partner a creditor of the debtor.

In Re Hedged-Investments Associates, Inc., Debtor. Harvey Sender, Trustee v. Johnson · filed 1996-05-23(10)

As established by 11 U.S.C. § 101(10), “creditor” means an “entity that has a claim against the debtor.” Since limited partners do not satisfy this definition on the basis of their partnership interests, they are not creditors on the basis of those interests.

Sections 101(5) and (12) encompass a defrauded investor’s restitution claim and the debtor’s liability on it, even when the investor should have discovered the fraud but lacked actual knowledge.

Jobin v. McKay · filed 1996-05-29(5), (12)

Because the Bankruptcy Code’s definition of “value” includes “satisfaction of an antecedent debt” and because the Code’s definition of “debt” includes “liability on a claim,” analysis of the trustees § 548(a)(2) claim requires us to determine whether Mr. McKay has a claim against M & L and, if so, whether M & L’s payments to him reduced that claim — thereby providing “reasonably equivalent value.” ... As a result, in light of the bankruptcy court’s factual finding that he did not have actual knowledge of the fraud, Mr. McKay has a colorable claim to recover the amounts that he invested in M & L.

Section 101(5)(B) treats an equitable obligation as a claim only if breach gives rise to a right to payment; the cost of compliance alone is insufficient.

Industrial Salvage, Inc. v. Illinois (In Re Industrial Salvage, Inc.) · filed 1996-06-06(5)(B)

Thus, while an equitable obligation constitutes a “claim” under § 101(5)(B) if money may be substituted for performance of the obligation, such an obligation does not become a “claim” merely because it requires the expenditure of money.

Section 101(5)(A) includes a right to payment for foreclosure costs that arises under state law and is contingent on the mortgagor redeeming the property.

In Re Tricca · filed 1996-06-07(5)(A)

The Bank has established that, at case commencement, it had a claim, pursuant to ch. 244, § 19, within the meaning of § 101(5)(A).

Section 101(5) requires a right to payment; a person injured only after plan confirmation has no prepetition claim merely because the debtor made the product before bankruptcy.

Kewanee Boiler Corp. v. Smith (In Re Kewanee Boiler Corp.) · filed 1996-07-11(5)

In this case, Smith had no § 101(5) “right to payment” at all under non-bankruptcy law at any time prior to Debtor’s confirmation and therefore had no pre-petition or pre-confirmation “claim” under that provision.

Section 101(5) includes a defrauded investor’s colorable right to restitution as a claim even if the investor should have known of the fraud but lacked actual knowledge.

In Re M & L Business Machine Company, Inc. · filed 1996-07-16(5)

Because the Bankruptcy Code's definition of "value" includes "satisfaction of an antecedent debt" and because the Code's definition of "debt" includes "liability on a claim," analysis of the trustees § 548(a)(2) claim requires us to determine whether Mr. McKay has a claim against M & L and, if so, whether M & L's payments to him reduced that claim--thereby providing "reasonably equivalent value." ... As a result, in light of the bankruptcy court's factual finding that he did not have actual knowledge of the fraud, Mr. McKay has a colorable claim to recover the amounts that he invested in M & L.

Section 101(5)’s definition of a claim includes a fraud claim that the creditor should have fairly contemplated before plan confirmation.

Corman v. Morgan (In Re Morgan) · filed 1996-06-17(5)

Adoption of the “fairly contemplated” test is the best way to balance the Code’s fresh start policy, on the one hand, and its measured hostility to fraud, on the other. On the one hand, adoption of this test will serve the goal of giving debtors a fresh start by forcing all creditors who know or should know before confirmation of their fraud claims against the debtor to bring those claims in the bankruptcy case, thus allowing those claims to be resolved under the Code’s special provisions for fraud and discharge.

A guarantor holding a contingent claim against a debtor is a creditor entitled to notice of the bankruptcy petition.

United States v. Erkard · filed 1996-07-25(5), (10)

As a guarantor, the United States was a holder of a contingent claim against the debtor, and as such, was a creditor entitled to notice of the debtor’s bankruptcy petition.

A disputed or contingent right to payment of litigation costs and attorneys’ fees is a claim under § 101(5), and that claim is also a debt under § 101(12).

In the Matter of Southmark Corporation, Debtor. Southmark Corporation v. Schulte Roth & Zabel · filed 1996-08-01(5), (12)

In the absence of a compelling reason why this line of authority would not be applicable to the instant case, we conclude that, as the Parks Group had a “claim” for these expenditures prior to the execution of the Agreement, a “debt” of Southmark also existed for these expenditures prior to the execution of the Agreement.

A contingent right to payment is a claim under § 101(5)(A), and an entity holding a prepetition claim is a creditor under § 101(10)(A).

In Re Barney's, Inc. · filed 1996-08-05(5)(A), (10)(A)

A “creditor” is any “entity that has a claim against the debtor that arose at the time of or before the order for relief concerning the debtor.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(10)(A). A “claim” is a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidat-ed, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured or unsecured.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A). ... It hasn’t and by statute the Fund is eligible for appointment to the Committee.

Section 101(5)(A) includes a contingent statutory right to payment, such as a license reinstatement fee that becomes payable if reinstatement is requested.

Clayton v. Tennessee Department of Safety (In re Clayton) · filed 1996-08-07(5)(A)

With all due respect to the Geiger opinion, this court nonetheless finds that the term “claim” or “debt” under the Bankruptcy Code is broad enough to encompass the contingent or unmatured “fees” imposed by Tenn.Code Ann. § 55-12-129.

Section 101 includes contingent and unliquidated rights to payment within the definition of a claim and defines debt as liability on a claim.

Turner v. Small Business Administration (In re Turner) · filed 1996-09-16(5)(A), (12)

An insufficiency can exist, however, even if a claim or debt is unliquidated or contingent. ... "Debt” is defined as “liability on a claim” and "claim” is defined as a "right to payment, whether or not such right is ... liquidated, unliquidat-ed, fixed, contingent, matured, [or] unma-tured. ...” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A) (claim) & (12) (debt). ... Ninety days before the petition was filed this duty to pay may have been unliquidated, or even contingent, but it still represented a right to payment from which an insufficiency could later be calculated.

Section 101(5)(A)’s definition of a claim includes interest as part of a right to payment.

Pierce v. Pyritz · filed 1996-09-09(5)(A)

A “debt” is “a liability on a claim.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(12). A “claim,” in turn, is broadly defined as a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgement, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A). This broad definition includes interest.

Section 101(5)(A) includes an unfiled, contingent right to equitable distribution within its definition of a claim.

Justice v. Justice · filed 1996-09-17(5)(A)

"Claim" is defined under the Bankruptcy Code as a "right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured." 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A) (1986). Therefore, the question of whether a particular action qualifies as a pre-petition claim does not depend on whether the action was actually filed.

Section 101(5)(B) does not treat a regulatory injunction as a claim when payment cannot substitute for compliance.

Holbrook v. Huntington Kildare, Inc., No. Cv 950548320 (Sep. 17, 1996) · filed 1996-09-17(5)(B)

Having done so, as the statutes required him to, for the sole purpose of avoiding "loss of life or property damage," Conn. Gen. Stat. § 22a-402 , the plaintiff was not empowered to accept a payment in lieu of the compliance with his order. Thus the plaintiff's instant claim for injunctive relief is not a "claim," within the meaning of the Federal Bankruptcy Code, and this action is not subject to the automatic stay.

A claim under § 101(5)(A) requires a right to payment; unpaid estimated tax installments do not create a prepetition claim when the IRS has no right to their payment.

In Re Michaelson · filed 1996-10-04(5)(A)

Claim is defined in § 101(5)(A) as a “right to payment”. ... Furthermore, the IRS had no right to payment of the installments at bankruptcy filing, and never subsequently acquired a right to’ payment of the installments.

Section 101 defines debt as liability on a claim and claim as a right to payment that may be unmatured, so postpetition interest can remain a debt even when it is not an allowed claim.

Winchell v. Town of Wilmington (In Re Winchell) · filed 1996-09-18(5)(A), (12)

Debt is defined as “liability on a claim,” 11 U.S.C. § 101(12), and claim is defined as “right to payment, whether or not such right is ... matured [or] unmatured.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A). It is true that under § 502(b)(2) of the Code, the Court must deny any claim (or portion thereof) for interest not matured as of the date on which the bankruptcy case was commenced, such that no creditor can have an “allowed claim” for post-petition interest. 11 U.S.C. § 502(b)(2). But sections 1141(d)(2) and 523(a) do not limit their exceptions from discharge to “allowed claims,” a term that the drafters of the Code used where they saw fit. See, for example, 11 U.S.C. §§ 726(a) and 1129(b)(2). Rather, the exceptions from discharge extend to “debts,” which are defined as rights to payment, “whether matured or unmatured.”

Section 101(5) defines a claim as a right to payment, which can include unpaid taxes before the IRS assesses them.

Vines v. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Vines) · filed 1996-09-27(5)

Assertion of a claim in bankruptcy is the assertion to a right to payment. The IRS does not need an assessment to assert such a right to payment, just as a creditor does not need a judgment, see 11 U.S.C. § 101(5) (West 1993).

Section 101(12) defines a debt as liability on a claim; routine advances against uncollected deposits do not create a debt to the bank.

Laws III v. United MO Bank · filed 1996-10-21(12)

Although the issue is not free from doubt, we conclude that routine advances against uncollected deposits do not create a "debt" to the bank.

Section 101(12) defines a debt as liability on a claim; a voluntary renewal fee creates no debt when the carrier has no obligation to pay it.

National Motor Freight Traffic Ass'n v. Superior Fast Freight, Inc. (In Re Superior Fast Freight, Inc.) · filed 1996-10-25(12)

This rule is consistent with the Code’s definition of “debt,” as “liability on a claim.” ... Accordingly, as the only evidence submitted by Superior as to the existence of a contractual obligation is conclusory, and Superior has the burden of proof to show the existence of a debt, we conclude that National Motor is entitled to summary judgment on the ground that the payment in question was not payment on a “debt,” antecedent or otherwise.

Routine bank advances against uncollected deposits do not create a debt under § 101(12).

Berry F. Laws, Iii, Trustee v. United Missouri Bank of Kansas City, N.A., the Missouri Bankers Association, Amicus Curia · filed 1996-11-26(12)

The Code defines “debt” as a “liability on a claim.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(12). ... Although the issue is not free from doubt, we conclude that routine advances against uncollected deposits do not create a “debt” to the bank.

Section 101(5) includes contingent and unliquidated rights to payment in the definition of a claim, so a personal property tax claim can arise before bankruptcy even if the tax is due later.

In Re Wang Zi Cashmere Products, Inc. · filed 1996-10-23(5)

The term “claim” is defined in the Bankruptcy Code to include any right to payment. 11 U.S.C. § 101(5). This right to payment need not be fixed and may be contingent or unliq-uidated. ... Therefore, this claim qualifies under the definition of “claim” in 11 U.S.C. § 101(5) and Howard County held the subject personal property tax claim as of the commencement of the case.

Section 101(5)(A) includes unmatured and contingent rights to future payments within the definition of a claim.

United Mine Workers of America 1992 Benefit Plan v. Leckie Smokeless Coal Co. · filed 1996-10-29(5)(A)

In accordance with Congress's desire that we interpret the term "claim" broadly, and in light of the statute's express indication that even unmatured and contingent rights to payment are to be regarded as claims, we hold that the Plan and Fund do have claims to future premium payments.

Section 101(10)(A) includes a fully secured creditor with a claim against the debtor that arose at or before the order for relief.

State Bank of Graymont v. Rich (In Re Rich) · filed 1996-10-30(10)(A)

11 U.S.C. § 101(10)(A) defines the term “creditor” as an “entity that has a claim against the debtor that arose at the time of or before the order for relief concerning the debtor(.)” Plaintiff is a creditor of Debtor under this definition; as such, the plain language of the Bankruptcy Code provides that Plaintiff may object to the granting of Debtor’s discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727.

Section 101(10)’s definition of “creditor” does not require a direct claim and can include an indenture trustee authorized to represent bondholders.

In Re Value Merchants, Inc. · filed 1996-11-13(10)

For while the indenture trustees’ claims are indirect and representative of other claims, the definition of “creditor” in the Code is a broad one which contains no requirement of “directness.”

Section 101(10) defines a creditor as an entity with a claim against the debtor; an agency with no right to collect a judgment payable to a receiver is not a creditor.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Cross (In Re Cross) · filed 1996-12-11(10)

The term creditor is defined as an “(A) entity that has a claim against the debtor that arose at the time of or before the order for relief concerning the debtor.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(10). ... The Amended Order expressly provides that Cross is to pay the judgment to the Receiver and therefore, the SEC does not have a claim against Cross for the amount of the judgment debt.

Section 101(5)(A) includes a contingent right to payment for sanctions as a claim when the possibility of an award was within the parties’ contemplation before the bankruptcy filing.

Big Yank Corp. v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance (In Re Water Valley Finishing, Inc.) · filed 1996-12-19(5)(A)

The general principle is that a claim in the form of an unmatured or contingent right to payment can fairly be deemed to arise pre-petition if, prior to the bankruptcy filing, the possibility of the claim was in the contemplation of the parties. ... It is fair to say that in this case, the claim was within the contemplation of the parties prepetition and preconfirmation.

Section 101(5) includes future time-share assessments in the definition of a claim when payment depends on continued ownership and later assessments.

Matter of Mattera · filed 1997-01-07(5)

We conclude from this definitional structure that at the time of the filing of debtor’s Chapter 13 petition, the obligation of the debtor to Ocean High for post-petition assessments was a contingent, unmatured, un-liquidated, unfixed right to payment which constituted a “claim” and a “debt” for § 1328(a) discharge purposes. The claim was contingent upon the retention of ownership by the debtor, and the regular assessment of fees by the association.

Section 101(5) includes contingent withdrawal liability as a claim before an employer withdraws from a pension plan when the liability has significant roots in the period before confirmation and withdrawal could fairly have been anticipated.

In Re CD Realty Partners · filed 1997-02-18(5)

For these reasons, the Court holds that the Debtor’s withdrawal liability was a “claim” within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 101(5) of the Bankruptcy Code when the Debtor commenced its Chapter 11 case and obtained confirmation of its plan.

Section 101(5) includes an equitable remedy for breach within a bankruptcy claim when the breach gives rise to a right to payment.

Diesel Performance, Inc. v. G. Paoletti Co. (In Re G. Paoletti, Inc.) · filed 1997-01-09(5)

A seller’s failure to deliver goods to a buyer is a breach of performance that gives the buyer a right to money damages from the seller. Cal.Comm.Code § 2711(1). As a result, in a bankruptcy case, a buyer’s rights under section 2502 of the Commercial Code give the buyer nothing ... more than a claim against the bankruptcy estate.

Section 101(5)(A) includes unmatured and unliquidated rights to payment as claims, so taxes for a year that ended before bankruptcy can be prepetition claims even if the return is not yet due.

In Re Nolan · filed 1997-02-20(5)(A)

Because "claim" includes unmatured and unliquidated rights to payment, it is not outcome determinative that the debtor's 1986 tax return was not yet due at the petition on February 9, 1987.

Section 101 treats an agency’s right to reimbursement for remediation costs arising from a debtor’s prepetition conduct as a claim and a debt when the debtor must pay the agency for the work.

Durham Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Agency v. Jimmo (In Re Jimmo) · filed 1997-01-16(5), (12)

The court concludes that this contention of the plaintiff is unpersuasive, and its claim for reimbursement of remediation costs, based on the debtors’ prepetition activities, qualifies as a claim and a debt under the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 101(5) includes an unmatured right to payment within the definition of a claim.

Denmon v. Runyon · filed 1997-01-21(5)

Under this definition, the original bill of costs filed in this case represented an unmatured claim, but nevertheless would constitute a claim under 11 U.S.C. § 101(5). Application of the broad definition is particularly appropriate here when one considers that defendant had filed prematurely, making the claim appear mature to plaintiff. We agree with the use of the broad definition of claim under this situation.

Section 101 defines a claim as a right to payment and a debt as liability on a claim; an attorney’s vested interest in settlement proceeds is not a claim against the debtor’s estate.

Swartz v. Odle (In re Odle) · filed 1997-02-05(5), (12)

The Bankruptcy Code defines a “claim” as a “right to payment” and a “debt” as a “liability on a claim”. 11 U.S.C. § 101(5) and (12). Because Mr. Cullison’s 20% interest is a property interest rather than a debt subject to discharge, Mr. Cullison does not have a valid claim against the Debtor’s bankruptcy estate.

Section 101 defines a debt as liability on a claim and a claim as a right to payment; those definitions encompass liability for punitive and compensatory fraud damages.

In Re: Edward Cohen v. · filed 1997-02-06(5)(A), (12)

Liability under state law for damages caused by fraud, whether punitive or compensatory, clearly represents a debt within the meaning of the bankruptcy code. ... Under the Code, a "debt" is defined as "liability on a claim." ... A "claim" is further defined as a "right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment . . . ." 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A).

A creditor must hold a claim, which includes a contingent right to payment; someone with no right to contribution is not a contingent creditor.

Ragsdale v. Bank South, N.A. (In Re Whitacre Sunbelt, Inc.) · filed 1997-02-06(5), (10)

A creditor is someone who has a claim, and a claim is broadly defined in the Bankruptcy Code as a right to payment, including a contingent right to payment. ... Mr. Whitacre has no contingent claim for contribution against Whit-acre Sunbelt and is not a contingent creditor of Whitacre Sunbelt.

Section 101(5)(A) treats a cleanup order as a dischargeable claim only if the order can be converted into a right to payment.

Am International, Inc. v. Datacard Corporation, Dbs, Inc., Addressograph Farrington, Inc. · filed 1997-02-11(5)(A)

Whether a cleanup order can be discharged in bankruptcy depends on whether the order can be converted into a monetary obligation. Only orders which can be turned into a "right to payment" are considered dischargeable "claims" for bankruptcy purposes.

Section 101(4) defines a claim as a right to payment; debenture holders with an unconditional right to payment retain their claims when an indenture trustee joins an involuntary petition.

Grey v. Federated Group, Inc. (In re Federated Group, Inc.) · filed 1997-02-20(4)

The Code defines “claim” as a “right to payment.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(4). Before the joinder of the indenture trustee, Grey and Heerey were holders of claims because the terms of the Federated indenture instrument gave them an absolute and unconditional right to payment.

A creditor’s asserted interest in state fraudulent-transfer remedies does not qualify as a debt for purposes of § 523(a)(6) when the creditor had no judgment or security interest in the transferred property at the time of transfer.

In Re Vergil Saylor Roberta Saylor, Debtors. Phillip Quarre, Trustee of the Quarre Marital Trust v. Robert · filed 1997-03-03(12)

A debt is a “liability on a claim”, see 11 U.S.C. § 101(12), i.e., a “right to payment” or a “right to an equitable remedy for breach of performance if such breach gives rise to a right to payment[.]” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(B). ... Quarre’s claim that he possesses a property interest in the fraudulent transfer remedies provided by state law does not fit within the definitions of either “debt” or “property” for purposes of section 523(a)(6), and runs counter to the long-standing principle that exceptions to dischargeability are to be narrowly construed.

Under § 101(5)(A), a person has no claim for a future injury before the injury occurs because there is no right to payment, even a contingent or unmatured one.

Schwinn Cycling & Fitness, Inc. v. Benonis (In Re Schwinn Bicycle Co.) · filed 1997-03-07(5)(A)

Moreover, a claim in bankruptcy is defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A) as “a right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured.” At confirmation, no Defendant had any such “claim.” Benonis had not yet been injured and therefore had no “right to payment” at all under nonbankruptcy law at any time prior to Debtors’ confirmation and therefore had no pre-petition or pre-confirmation “claim”. His “future claim” was not “contingent” or “unmatured” in any legal sense pre-petition or pre-confirmation.

Section 101(5) includes a creditor's contingent negligent-construction claim arising from prepetition conduct, even when the defect is discovered later.

In Re Hassanally · filed 1997-03-14(5)

The Code includes contingent and unmatured rights to payment within the definition of claim. ... On these facts, the determination of when the claim arose under federal law need not be analyzed any further than when the alleged negligent conduct occurred, for a contingent claim arose at that time.

Section 101(5) includes a right to payment for a violation that was susceptible to detection before bankruptcy, even if the claimant was unaware of it.

In Re Envirodyne Industries, Inc. · filed 1997-03-19(5)

A claim is defined by the Bankruptcy Code, in § 101(5) as follows: ... Plaintiffs’ antitrust claim was similarly discharged by the Confirmation Order. According to the Plaintiffs’ own allegations in the Antitrust Lawsuits, the antitrust violations took place beginning in 1990, well before the case was commenced. The alleged violations were as susceptible to detection as the chemical contamination in the Texaco case. The claims were matured and uncontingent at that time and were therefore discharged by the Confirmation Order.

Section 101(5) includes contingent and unmatured claims, so courts look to the underlying basis of a claim.

In Re Parkview Hospital-Osteopathic Medical Center · filed 1997-05-02(5)

The clear purpose of § 101(5) of the Bankruptcy Code, which provides that claims in bankruptcy can be contingent or unmatured, is that the court should look to the underlying basis of the claims.

A bankruptcy court judgment in an adversary proceeding is a right to payment and therefore a debt under § 101.

Smith v. Young (In Re Young) · filed 1997-04-04(5)(A), (12)

The court went on to espouse that, under § 523(a)(4), the dischargeability of both punitive and the full range of compensatory damages depends on whether such claims represent a debt. “The Code defines ‘debt’ as ‘liability on a claim,’ 11 U.S.C. § 101(12), and a ‘claim’ as a ‘right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment’ 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A).” ... The very same analysis goes for bankruptcy court judgments in adversary proceedings.

Section 101(5) does not treat recoupment asserted as a defense, without seeking payment from the estate, as a claim.

A & C Electric Co. v. Meade Electric Co. (In Re a & C Electric Co.) · filed 1997-04-11(5)

There is a minority view taken in ... wherein those opinions found that a right to recoupment constitutes a claim under 11 U.S.C. § 101(5) and is therefore dischargeable. That view is misplaced. A “claim” is defined as either a “right to payment” or “right to an equitable remedy for breach of performance if such breach gives rise to a right to payment....” In contrast, recoupment is a defense to the amount claimed and, in this case, is an assertion of right against funds received from the owner.

Section 101(12) defines a debt as liability on a claim; without a basis for the debtor’s liability, a plaintiff has no debt against the debtor.

Haemonetics Corp. v. Dupre (In re Theresa Dupre) · filed 1997-05-22(12)

A “debt” is a “liability on a claim.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(12). ... Lacking a tort the Plaintiffs lack a debt, and hence judgment must enter for the Theresa on the complaint.

Section 101(12) defines debt as liability on a claim; the amount owed is not reduced to what a Chapter 13 plan proposes to pay.

In Re Knize · filed 1997-06-17(12)

The Code defines debt as “liability on a claim.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(12). ... Therefore, for purposes of qualifying under § 109(e), it is only relevant how much the debtor owes, not how much the debtor actually intends to pay or can pay or will pay through the Plan.

Accrued interest is a claim under § 101(5)(A) because it is a right to payment.

Rupp v. United States (In Re Rocky Mountain Refractories) · filed 1997-05-30(5)(A)

Pursuant to § 101(5)(A), a "claim" means a "right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured." Accrued interest constitutes a "right to payment."

A deficit used only to calculate a future dividend is not a claim under § 101(5) when it gives the insurer no right to payment.

In Re Smith Corona Corp. · filed 1997-06-17(5)

The deficit is not a claim. A claim is a right to payment. 11 U.S.C. § 101(5). Prudential conceded, and Smith Corona did not dispute, that Prudential has no right to payment for the deficit. It is an accounting entry that is utilized for the purposes of calculating a future dividend owed to Smith Corona. Therefore, the analysis of recoupment law offered by Smith Corona is inapplicable.

Section 101(5)(A) defines a claim to include a disputed right to payment.

In Re Sierra-Cal · filed 1997-06-27(5)(A)

Affected creditors include all creditors, even those with contingent, unliquidated, or disputed claims. Section 1129(a)(7) does not refer to “allowed claims” or any other qualifying term. Rather, it uses the defined term “claim” that means a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or to unsecured.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A).

Section 101’s definitions allow the United States as a whole or an individual federal agency to be treated as a creditor.

United States v. Maxwell (In Re Pyramid Industries, Inc.) · filed 1997-06-17(10), (15), (27)

Consequently, the plain language of the statute does not indicate that “creditor” is limited to either the United States or a specific agency of the government. In fact, the use of the conjunctive “or” arguably indicates that the “creditor” may include either the entire United States government as well as the individual agencies thereof.

A loan from a debtor’s pension account creates no claim under § 101(5) or debt under § 101(12) when the plan can only offset the loan against the debtor’s account and has no right to repayment.

In Re Fulton · filed 1997-07-07(5), (12)

The right of repayment is determinative of these cases. Absent the existence of a right of repayment, there can be no “claim” and, thus, no “debt.”

Section 101 defines the creditor, indenture trustee, and equity security holder categories used to determine who may file a proof of claim.

Moore v. Harrell (In Re Harrell) · filed 1997-07-10(10), (17), (29)

The Debtor is neither a creditor, an indenture trustee, nor an equity security ... holder as defined by the code.

Section 101(12) defines a debt as liability on a claim; disallowed attorney’s fees create no debt when the debtor is not liable for them.

Jensen v. Gantz (In Re Gantz) · filed 1997-07-15(12)

Debt is defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(12) as “liability on a claim.” Claim is defined, among other things, as a right to payment. 11 U.S.C. § 101(5). ... Here, the fees Jensen now seeks to collect from the debtor were disallowed — thus there was nothing to discharge.

Section 101(5)’s broad definition of “claim” does not determine whether a claim is prepetition or postpetition; that depends on when the claim arises.

Dixon v. United States Ex Rel. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Dixon) · filed 1997-07-22(5)

A claim should be determined to be prepetition or postpetition based upon when it arises or comes into being. The broad definition of the term “claim” in § 101(5) provides no basis whatever for making that determination based upon any other criterion.

Section 101(5) includes personal injury claims that have not yet been reduced to judgment.

In Re Dow Corning Corp. · filed 1997-07-29(5)

In relevant part, the Bankruptcy Code defines a “claim” as a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5). Given this broad definition, there is no question that a personal injury claim not yet reduced to judgment falls within its scope.

Section 101(5)(A) includes a contractual right to attorney fees within a claim even when payment depends on fees being incurred later.

Keaton v. Boatmen's Bank (In Re Keaton) · filed 1997-08-28(5)(A)

Moreover, § 101(5)(A) broadly defines “claim” to include a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured.” ... In other words, by virtue of the contract, the Bank had a prepetition right to collect attorney fees, albeit an unmatured, contingent right; ie., the right was contingent upon the Bank actually incurring attorney fees in collecting the debt.

Section 101(5) treats an obligation as a prepetition claim when the events creating the right to payment occurred before bankruptcy, even if payment comes due later.

Buckner v. Westmoreland Coal Co. (In Re Westmoreland Coal Co.) · filed 1997-09-05(5)

When all of the events which give rise to a liability occur prepetition, the resulting claim is a prepetition claim.

A holder of a disgorgement order has a claim and qualifies as a creditor under Section 101.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Kane (In Re Kane) · filed 1997-08-12(5)(A), (10)(A)

A creditor is an “entity that has a claim against the debtor that arose at the time of or before the order for relief concerning the debtor.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(10)(A) (1994). A “claim” is defined as a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment ...” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A) (1994). As the holder of the disgorgement order, the Commission has a claim.

An estate with an enforceable claim under state law is a creditor that may seek a determination of dischargeability.

Caldwell v. Hanes (In Re Hanes) · filed 1997-09-17(10)(A)

The Code defines creditor as an “entity that has a claim against the debtor that arose at the time of or before the order for relief ...” 11 U.S.C. § 101(10)(A). A “claim” is defined as a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured ...” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5)(A). A “right to payment,” and whether an entity is entitled to it, is determined by examining the applicable state substantive law. ... Therefore, the Estate has an enforceable claim against Hanes under New York law, and thus, has standing to pursue its dischargeability claims.

Section 101(12) defines debt as liability on a claim; pension benefits owed to a former spouse by the plan are not the participant’s personal debt.

Gendreau v. Gendreau · filed 1997-08-15(12)

Debt is defined as a “liability on a claim,” 11 U.S.C. § 101(12), and claim is broadly defined to include a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5). ... Therefore, the claim is not a personal liability of William that could be discharged by his bankruptcy.

Section 101(5) treats an equitable remedy as a bankruptcy claim when the remedy gives rise to a right to payment, including when money damages can substitute for the remedy.

Air Line Pilots Ass'n v. Continental Airlines, LPP (In Re Continental Airlines) · filed 1997-08-29(5)

Therefore, we conclude that the right to seniority integration gives rise to a "right of payment" such that the remedy constitutes a "claim" dischargeable in bankruptcy.

Under the definitions of claim and debt, an entitlement to monthly pension proceeds that arises when each payment is received does not create a claim to all future payments upon retirement.

Martel v. Zeitler (In Re Zeitler) · filed 1997-09-22(5)(A), (12)

Notwithstanding the expansive language of § 101(12) and § 101(5)(A), Ms. Martel’s entitlement to the retirement proceeds did not arise until the retirement benefits were paid each month to Mr. Zeitler.

Section 101(5) includes an agency’s enforceable right to seek payment on behalf of injured consumers within the definition of a claim.

In Re Taibbi · filed 1997-09-25(5)

The Court believes that this scheme is sufficient to give OCA a right to payment — an “enforceable obligation” — on behalf of injured consumers.

Section 101(5) defines a claim as a right to payment; funds subject to such a right are not unclaimed property.

TLI, Inc. v. Lynn (In Re TLI, Inc.) · filed 1997-10-03(5)

Under the Code’s definition of “claim,” unclaimed property is that with respect to which no one has a right to payment.

Section 101(5) includes a right to payment for postpetition regime fees secured by a lien on the debtor’s property.

In re Wilder · filed 1997-10-16(5)

At the outset, this Court must determine whether Creditor has a valid claim as defined by 11 U.S.C. § 101(5). Pursuant to § 101(5), a claim includes any right to payment, whether or not liquidated as of the time of filing the case. ... Creditor holds a post-petition claim secured by a lien in the real property.

Section 101(5)'s broad definition of a claim includes antitrust claims arising from prepetition conduct even when the claimants did not discover them before confirmation.

In Re Envirodyne Industries, Inc. · filed 1997-10-23(5)

Appellants' antitrust claims are claims that were discharged by appellee Clear Shield's bankruptcy confirmation since they fit within the broad statutory definition of a claim prescribed by Congress in 11 U.S.C. § 101(5).

Section 101(5)'s broad definition of a claim includes antitrust claims capable of detection before bankruptcy confirmation, even if the claimants did not know of them.

Eisenberg Bros. v. Clear Shield National, Inc. · filed 1997-10-23(5)

Appellants’ antitrust claims are claims that were discharged by appellee Clear Shield’s bankruptcy confirmation since they fit within the broad statutory definition of a claim prescribed by Congress in 11 U.S.C. § 101(5). Appellants’ claims were capable of detection and thus mature and uncontingent at the time of the Confirmation Order.

Section 101(5) defines a claim as a right to payment even if a judgment has been reversed and the right remains disputed.

In Re Frye · filed 1997-11-24(5)

A valid claim exists that may be compromised. A claim is any “right to payment whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured or unsecured....” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5) (1994). Here, although the judgment obtained by the debtors has been reversed and remanded by the Virginia Supreme Court, a claim of the estate still exists which may be compromised by the trustee.

Section 101(10)(A) excludes a claimant whose claim arose after the bankruptcy petition from the definition of a creditor.

Licensing by Paolo, Inc. v. Sinatra · filed 1997-09-29(10)(A)

Because Design Studio’s putative claim arose after the bankruptcy petition was filed, it is not a creditor.

A creditor under § 101(10)(A) must have a claim against the debtor arising at or before the order for relief.

In Re Gucci · filed 1997-09-29(10)(A)

The Bankruptcy Code defines a creditor as an "entity that has a claim against the debtor that arose at the time of or before the order for relief concerning the debtor." 11 U.S.C. § 101(10)(A). Because Design Studio's putative claim arose after the bankruptcy petition was filed, it is not a creditor.

Section 101(12)’s definition of debt includes an obligation on a demand note.

National City Bank v. Plechaty (In Re Plechaty) · filed 1997-10-07(12)

The term debt is defined by the Bankruptcy Code. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(12). Nothing in the text of § 523(a), or any of its subparts, would exclude a demand note. No compelling authority has engrafted such a restriction onto the term debt. We decline to do so. It is clear that a demand note is a debt.

Section 101 defines a debt as liability on a claim and a claim as a right to payment; without a tax liability or right to payment, there is no existing tax debt.

Perkins v. United States (In Re Perkins) · filed 1997-10-10(5), (12)

Before it is necessary to make a determination whether a debt is nondischargeable under § 523(a), there must be a “debt.” A “debt” is a “liability on a claim.” A “claim” is a “right to payment.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5), (12). The IRS concedes that based on information presently in its possession, Debtor has no liability for 1992 taxes and the IRS has no right to payment for any 1992 taxes.

Section 101 defines a debt as liability on a claim and a claim as a right to payment or an equitable remedy.

Granados v. Granados (In Re Granados) · filed 1997-10-22(5), (12)

A “debt” means a liability on a claim. 11 U.S.C. § 101(12). A “claim” means a right to payment, or a right to an equitable remedy. 11 U.S.C. § 101(5). A discharge extinguishes rights to payment. It does not extinguish interests in property.

Section 101(5) includes a contingent, unmatured right to payment when a divorce decree awards pension benefits but the assignment has not become effective.

King v. King (In Re King) · filed 1997-10-23(5)

Because these steps were not completed as of the Petition Date, the Defendant held no vested interest in the pension. plan, but had, inter alia, a contingent and unmatured “right to payment” from the Plaintiff. Thus, there existed on the Petition Date “debt(s)” owed by the Plaintiff with respect to the Pension Award.

Section 101(5) includes a contingent right to payment as a claim, even when payment depends on a future event.

In Re Eli Witt Co. · filed 1997-11-26(5)

Additionally, the Bankruptcy Code defines a claim as a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(5). ... Nevertheless, AIG’s conditional right to payment from the Debtor arose pre-petition, when the Debtor entered into the agreement with AIG.

Section 101(5)(B) treats an equitable remedy for breach as a bankruptcy claim when the breach also gives rise to a right to payment.

TKO Properties, LLC v. Young (In Re Young) · filed 1997-11-18(5)(B)

Given the facts of this particular case, the Court concludes that TKO would have an alternative right to payment of its damages for the breach of its contract rights. This conclusion is evidently not disputed by TKO since in its first amended complaint, it prays for damages as an alternative claim. Thus, pursuant to Section 101(5)(B), TKO has a claim for purposes of bankruptcy, and its remedies in the bankruptcy case are therefore limited.