A Good Discussion on Objecting to Proof of Claims - 2014 case

The Trustee objected to FIA's proof of claim asserting in part that there were not sufficient documents to "prove up" its claim.  The Court initially set forth the burden of proof:

The burden is on the objecting party to produce evidence to refute at least one of the allegations that is essential to the claim's legal sufficiency.  If the objecting party meets his evidentiary burden, the burden shifts to the creditor, who retains the ultimate burden of persuasion as to the validity and amount of the claim.

In  this case, the Trustee argued that FIA's claims should be disallowed because they do not contain all of the information outlined in Rule 3001(c)(3)(A).  The Trustee contended that he could not determine the validity of the claim without the information. 

The Court determined that non-compliance with Rule 3001(c)(3)(A) is not one of the listed exceptions to have a claim disallowed under Section 502(b). 

The failure to provide documentation does not mean that the debtors do not owe the money.  Section 502(b) in part states that there must be proof that such claim is unenforceable against the debtor and property of the debtor, under any agreement or applicable law for a reason other than because such claim is contingent or unmatured (a variety of other reasons are set forth).

Accordingly, the Court denied the objection.

Khatibi v. Civil Action Fia Card Servs., N.A., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79873