Campbell v. Verizon Wireless S-CA (In Re Campbell)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• acknowledging that § 502(b)(1) requires disallowance of claims that are unenforceable under applicable law but rejecting contention that “applicable law” includes Rule 3001
• noting it was not clear whether creditor was proper party to appeal where it did not participate in bankruptcy court proceedings on debtors’ objections to claims
• “a creditor that files a proof of claim that lacks sufficient support under Rule 3001(c) and (f
• “[T]he bankruptcy court may properly consider as admissions or evidence any information contained in debtor’s bankruptcy schedules.... ”
• on facts indistinguishable from Heath, the court reiterated that the Bankruptcy Rules cannot expand 11 U.S.C. § 502
• “We also emphasize, as we did in Heath, that although Debtors’ admissions in their bankruptcy schedules can be binding that is not the basis of our decision.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).