Laserfiche WebLink
Case 1:20-bk-12043 Doc 621 Filed 02/24/21 Entered 02/24/21 14:52:42 Desc Main <br /> Document Page 5 of 40 <br /> factor trumps the others." Hefia v. Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors <br /> (In re Am. Classic Voyages Co.), 405 F.3d 127 (3d Cir. 2005) (citing George Harms Constr. Co. <br /> v. Chao, 371 F.3d 156, 164 (3d Cir. 2004)). <br /> THERE WAS NEITHER PREJUDICE TO THE DEBTORS NOR LENGTHY DELAY <br /> 26. Here, there was no prejudice whatsoever to the Debtors caused by the untimely <br /> filing of the Proofs of Claim. Both of the Proofs of Claim was timely mailed by the Debtors. <br /> Both Proofs of Claim at issue were filed within 24 hours of the Claims Bar Date, an exceedingly <br /> short delay. <br /> 27. Similarly, there is no way the Debtors can claim that they had inadequate notice of <br /> the claims against them. The Debtors, having been in receipt of Kenneth Cole's Complaint in the <br /> State Court Action for more than ten (10) months, were well aware of the extent of the claims by <br /> Kenneth Cole and Billie Cole as this type of claim is common in the mining industry. <br /> 28. Simply put, there has been neither prejudice to the debtor nor lengthy delay. In <br /> fact, quite the opposite is true. Kenneth Cole has the first two Pioneer factors strongly in its <br /> favor. <br /> THOUGH IT INADVERTENTLY ERRED, CLAIMANTS ACTED IN GOOD FAITH <br /> 29. Though the ability to timely file was within Kenneth Cole and Billie Cole control, <br /> a fact which Kenneth Cole Billie Cole does not deny, Kenneth Cole and Billie Cole acted here in <br /> good faith. <br /> 30. The failure to timely file the Proofs of Claim resulted from the inability of the <br /> Law Firm to obtain PACER credentials and a subsequent mailing delay when the alternate means <br /> of filing was available, certainly not any malicious action by Kenneth Cole, Billie Cole or <br />