In Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings, the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel's (BAP) denial of plaintiff-creditor's motion to allow an informal proof of claim based on its prior filings as a putative secured creditor is affirmed as the BAP did not abuse its discretion in finding that: 1) plaintiff had ample notice of the likelihood that it would lose its status as a secured creditor, necessitating the filing of a proof of claim; 2) plaintiff's unexplained delay weighed against allowing plaintiff's informal proof of claim; and 3) the large dilution in the distribution to other creditors in this case was an appropriate consideration weighing against allowing plaintiff's claim.
Argued: October 13, 2009
Decided and Filed: November 13, 2009
Opinion by Circuit Judge Gilman
For Appellant: David A. Freeburg, McFadden & Freeburg Co., LPA., Cleveland, Ohio
For Appellee: Lydia Evelyn Spragin, Akron, Ohio