Robert E. Grant
How Judge Grant rules, drawn from 26 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Grant
Robert E. Grant has served as a United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Northern District of Indiana since August 1987. He is based in Fort Wayne and hears matters in that division and at Lafayette.
Judge Grant's practices and standing orders
Rules for cases before Judge Grant, as published on the court's website (checked October 10, 2026). Judges revise these often, so confirm the current version on the court's site before you file.
- Loss Mitigation Program Procedures for Cases Assigned to Judge Grant ↗
- Frequently Asked Questions Concerning Practice & Procedure in Cases Assigned to Judge Grant ↗
- Remote Hearing Information for Judge Grant ↗
Key rules
Motions
To request emergency treatment, file a separate motion with the underlying request, state the cause and relief sought, and alert the clerk or chambers after filing.
“a separate motion for an emergency hearing or to shorten the notice period should be filed at the same time as the motion or application which counsel wants considered on an expedited basis. The motion should state both the cause for the expedited treatment and the type of expedited treatment sought, with particularity. Once the motion has been filed counsel should contact either the clerk’s office or a member of the chambers’ staff”
Motions
If a notice is rejected for a stated deficiency, use an appropriate post-judgment motion to contest or clarify it rather than calling chambers.
“If, after having made this review, counsel still has questions concerning the nature of any deficiency, would like a further explanation, or believes the court to be in error, please do not call chambers to ask. Instead, an appropriate post-judgment motion should be filed.”
Motions
In a contested matter, request Judge Grant’s loss-mitigation process at least seven days before the initial hearing.
“the Debtor may request Loss Mitigation with a Creditor by filing a motion with the court 7 days prior to the initial hearing on the contested matter.”
Conferences
Register at least 24 hours before a non-evidentiary remote hearing in a Hammond, South Bend, or Lafayette case; a separate registration is required for each hearing.
“Those wishing to do so must register with the court no later than 24 hours before the hearing at Remote Hearing Registration. Late registrations will not be accepted. A separate registration is required for each hearing the individual plans to attend remotely.”
Conferences
For a Fort Wayne case, ask chambers in advance whether telephonic participation will be permitted; video participation is unavailable.
“Although video participation is not an option for cases pending in the Fort Wayne division, participating by telephone may be. Proceedings which are suitable for telephonic participation generally require the matter to be scheduled by itself, not simply as one of a larger number of hearings scheduled for a particular time. They should not require the presentation of testimony or evidence and should involve only a limited number of participants who can be identified prior to the hearing. Counsel wishing to appear by phone should contact Judge Grant’s chambers’ staff”
Conferences
After a loss-mitigation order, the creditor has seven days to provide its information list, and the debtor has 21 days after receiving that list to submit a complete package.
“Seven days after the entry of the Loss Mitigation Order, the Creditor’s attorney shall provide the Debtor’s attorney (or Debtor, if pro se) a list of information required from the Debtor in order to consider the Debtor for Loss Mitigation. 2. Twenty-One days after the Creditor’s attorney provides the Debtor’s attorney with a list of required information, the Debtor’s attorney (or Debtor, if pro se) shall tender to Creditor’s attorney the information requested in Creditor’s initial request.”
Trial
Submit Fort Wayne and Lafayette pretrial orders jointly and make them self-contained.
“the court in Fort Wayne and Lafayette expects pretrial orders to be submitted jointly by all participants in the litigation. Furthermore, a pretrial order should be completely self-contained”
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 10, 2026).
How Judge Grant decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
A motion must supply specific facts that allow the court to exercise its discretion; the absence of an objection does not make the court a rubber stamp.
“the motion ‘must allege specific facts that, if true, would lead the court and others to the conclusion that granting the relief sought is the proper thing to do.’”
Cautions
A claim-documentation objection should connect its allegations to substantive enforceability rather than rely on generalized procedural complaints.
“Her only complaints involve the sufficiency of the information in the claim and the lack of documentation.”
In a Chapter 12 eligibility dispute, he found general denials of fraudulent intent insufficient against specific, uncontroverted evidence of a forged endorsement, false oaths, and missing assets.
“Faced with specific evidence of misconduct, the generalities debtors use to oppose the motion are not enough to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether fraud has been committed in connection with the case warranting dismissal or conversion under § 1208(d).”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The debtor/defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED, in part.”
“The motion is DENIED, for the following reasons:”
“The motion is DENIED, for the following reasons:”
“The trustee’s objection to the debtor’s motion to sell is overruled and the motion will be granted.”
“Her objection will, therefore, be overruled.”
“Her only complaints involve the sufficiency of the information in the claim and the lack of documentation; but as explained above, those objections are unfounded, and are therefore OVERRULED.”
“As explained above, those objections are themselves insufficient, and are therefore OVERRULED.”
“As explained above, those objections are themselves insufficient, and are therefore OVERRULED.”
“The trustee’s motion to modify the plan post confirmation does not change the confirmed plan is and is unnecessary. It is therefore DENIED.”
“As explained above, those objections are insufficient and are therefore OVERRULED.”
“As explained above, those objections are insufficient, and are therefore OVERRULED.”
“The trustee’s motion to modify the debtor’s confirmed plan, filed on July 24, 2025, is DENIED, without prejudice.”
Draft for Judge Grant with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Grant, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Grant's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace