Chemetron Corporation v. Jones

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, in substituting the “reasonably foreseeable” test for the “reasonably ascertainable” standard, the bankruptcy court applied the incorrect rule of law
• holding that notice to an unknown creditor is sufficient when it was published in the The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal
• holding that publication in two national newspapers and seven local newspapers was constitutionally sufficient
• stating that the district court erred in failing to consider the debtor’s role in the creditor’s delay
• explaining that \[k]nown creditors must be provided with actual written notice of a debtor's bankruptcy filing and bar claims date\
• explaining that due process is satisfied for notice purposes when known creditors are provided with actual written notice of a debtor's bankruptcy filing and bar claims date

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).