ESTEBAN CRUZ DELGADO and NOEMI MANSO SANTIAGO

1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR
THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
IN RE:
ESTEBAN CRUZ DELGADO 	CASE NO. 07-02393 BKT
NOEMI MANSO SANTIAGO 	Chapter 7
XXX-XX-7506
XXX-XX-0582
FILED & ENTERED ON 03/28/2011
Debtor(s)
OPINION AND ORDER
This proceeding is before the Court upon Creditor Mariely Almeda Cruz ("Movant" )
Opposition to be included in the Bankruptcy case [Dkt No. 99], the Debtors’ reply to the Movant’s
Opposition [Dkt No. 125], the Debtors’ answer to order [Dkt No. 129], the Trustee’s reply in
compliance with court order as per Debtor's reply [Dkt No. 143], the Debtors’ Sur-Reply to Trustee's
Motion [Dkt No. 145] and Movant’s Motion in compliance with order and second opposition to be
included in the bankruptcy case [Dkt. No. 146]. For the reasons set forth below, this Court denies
Movant's requests to be excluded from this bankruptcy case.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Joint Debtors Esteban Cruz Delgado and Noemi Manso Santiago filed a voluntary Chapter 13
petition on May 2, 2007. During the pendency of the bankruptcy case, joint Debtor Noemi Manso
Case:07-02393-BKT7 Doc#:162 Filed:03/28/11 Entered:03/28/11 15:09:26 Desc: Main
Document Page 1 of 3

2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Santiago (“Santiago”), was involved in an automobile accident with Movant. After Movant brought
a civil suit to collect damages accruing from this accident, the Debtors moved to amend Schedule F
to include her as a creditor. Movant opposed the amendment, and the Debtors moved for conversion
of their case to Chapter 7, which was later granted by this Court [Dkt. No. 116]. Movant contends
that the Debtors improperly included her as a creditor in their bankruptcy case because her claim
accrued after the filing of the Chapter 13 petition. 	The Debtors respond that, pursuant to 11
U.S.C.A. § 348(d), the conversion of the case to Chapter 7 causes Movant’s claim to be considered
as having accrued immediately before the date of the filing of the petition, making it an allowed
claim.
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
The main issue to be determined is whether the Movant was properly included in the
Debtors’ bankruptcy case. Generally, claims that accrue following the petition date are not allowed
claims. However, 11 U.S.C.A. § 348(d) states that “[a] claim against the estate or the debtor that
arises after the order for relief but before conversion […] shall be treated for all purposes as if such
claim had arisen immediately before the date of the filing of the petition.” 	In this case, the
conversion order make Movant’s claim one that shall be treated as though it arose immediately
before the date of the filing of the petition. Therefore, the post-petition/pre-conversion claim is
allowed to be included in the bankruptcy case. In regards to dischargeability, the matter is not
properly submitted before the Court for resolution pursuant to Fed. R. Bktcy P. 7001(4) and/or (6).
Case:07-02393-BKT7 Doc#:162 Filed:03/28/11 Entered:03/28/11 15:09:26 Desc: Main
Document Page 2 of 3

3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
III. CONCLUSION
Having found that Movant’s claim was properly included, that no basis exists to determine
that it is not an allowed claim, and that the Court is not in a position to determine the dischargeability
of her debt, this Court DENIES the Movant’s requests to be excluded from this Bankruptcy case
[Dkt. No. 99 and 146].
SO ORDERED.
San Juan, Puerto Rico this 28 day of March, 2011.
Brian K. Tester
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge
Case:07-02393-BKT7 Doc#:162 Filed:03/28/11 Entered:03/28/11 15:09:26 Desc: Main
Document Page 3 of 3