shl Doc 8710 Filed 06/14/13 Entered 06/14/13 11:58:27 Main Document Pg 1 of 6

Transcription

1 Pg 1 of 6 STATE OF CONNECTICUT OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL 55 Elm Street, P.O. Box 120 Hartford, Connecticut Telephone (860) Facsimile (860) Denise S. Mondell, Assistant Attorney General Attorneys for the Creditor, State of Connecticut Department of Revenue Services UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Chapter 11 AMR CORPORATION, et al., Case No (SHL) (Jointly Administered) Debtors. RESPONSE OF THE CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE SERVICES TO THE DEBTORS FIFTY-THIRD OMNIBUS OBJECTION TO CLAIMS The State of Connecticut, Department of Revenue Services (hereinafter, the Department ), hereby responds to the Fifty-Third Omnibus Objection to Claims filed by the Debtors on May 24, 2013 (hereinafter, the Objection ). For its response, the Department respectfully represents as follows 1. On May 28, 2012, the Department filed claim no in the total amount of $27, against American Airlines, Inc. The priority portion of the claim in the amount of $21, consists of estimated 2011 corporation taxes, estimated alcohol floor taxes for the months 6/11 through 11/11, and a sales and use tax audit assessment for the period 1/1/08

2 Pg 2 of 6 11/30/11 in the amount of $20, The general unsecured portion of the claim in the total amount of $6, consists of a use tax audit assessment for the period from 1/1/08 through 11/30/08 and penalties related to the debtors failure to file alcohol floor tax returns for 6/11, 7/11, 8/11, and 9/ In their Objection, the debtors seek an order disallowing and expunging claim no on the ground that claim no is no longer valid because [it has] been satisfied in full by the Debtors, in the ordinary course of business or as authorized by the Court pursuant to the Final Order Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. 105(a), 363(b), 507(a)(8), and 541 (i) Authorizing, But Not Directing, Debtors to pay Prepetition Taxes and Assessments, and (ii) Authorizing, But Not Directing, Debtors to Pay Prepetition Taxes and Assessments, and (ii) Authorizing and Directing Financial Institutions to Honor and Process Related Checks and Transfers (ECF No. 452) (Objection, 8). 3. Notwithstanding the Debtors contention that claim no has been satisfied, the Department has no record that the Debtors made any payments in connection with the tax periods set forth on claim no The Department submits that its claim should not be disallowed on the basis of the Debtors unsupported allegation the claim has been paid. A proof of claim executed and filed in accordance with the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure shall constitute prima facie evidence of the validity and amount of the claim. Fed. R. Bankr. Proc. 3001(f); U.S. v. Braunstein (In re Pan), 209 B.R. 152, 155 (D. Mass 1997). In order to overcome the presumed validity of a proof of claim, an objection must be supported by substantial evidence, i.e., the 2

3 Pg 3 of 6 objector must produce evidence equal in force to the prima facie case. In re Allegheny Intern., Inc. 954 F. 2d 167, (3 rd Cir. 1992); Matter or Lake Placid Oil, Co., 988 F.2d 554, 557 (5 th Cir. 1993), reh g den., 4 F.3d 992 (5 th Cir. 1993); In re Pan, 209 B.R. at 155; In re White, 168 B.R. 825, 829 (Bankr. D. Conn. 1994); In re Frederes, 98 B.R. 165 (Bankr. W.D.N.Y. 1989). Since the debtor s objection sets forth nothing more than a bald assertion that claim no has been satisfied, it is insufficient to rebut the presumed correctness of the Department s claim. 5. Moreover, the United States Supreme Court made clear in Raleigh v. Illinois Dept. Of Revenue, 530 U.S. 15, 120 S.Ct (2000), that notwithstanding the debtor s bankruptcy, the burden of proof on a tax claim remains where the substantive tax law of the state places it. Under Connecticut law, it is well-established that the burden of proving payment of a debt rests on the party claiming payment. Stanley v. M.H. Rhodes, Inc., 140 Conn. 689, 697, 103 A.2d 539 (1954); Apuzzo v. Hoer, 125 Conn. 196, 203, 4 A.2d 424 (1930); Selvaggi v. Miron, 60 Conn. App. 600, , 760 A.2d 539 (2000). 6. Since the Department has no record that any part of claim no has been paid, it is incumbent on the Debtors to produce evidence of such payment before their objection can be sustained. WHEREFORE, the Department asks that 1) debtor s objection to claim no be denied; 2) that claim no be allowed as a priority claim in the amount of $21, and a general unsecured claim in the amount $6,567.37; and 3) for such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. 3

4 Pg 4 of 6 Dated June 14, 2013 Hartford, Connecticut STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE SERVICES GEORGE JEPSEN ATTORNEY GENERAL BY /s/ Denise S. Mondell Denise S. Mondell (DM-8434) Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General 55 Elm Street, 4th Floor P.O. Box 120 Hartford, CT Tel (860) Fax (860) Denise.Mondell@ct.gov 4

5 Pg 5 of 6 STATE OF CONNECTICUT OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL 55 Elm Street, P.O. Box 120 Hartford, Connecticut Telephone (860) Facsimile (860) Denise S. Mondell, Assistant Attorney General Attorneys for the Creditor, State of Connecticut Department of Revenue Services UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re Chapter 11 AMR CORPORATION, et al., Case No (SHL) (Jointly Administered) Debtors. CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on June 14, 2013, a copy of the foregoing Response of the State of Connecticut, Department of Revenue Services to Debtors Fifty-Third Omnibus Objection To Claims was served by first class mail, postage pre-paid to the following Debtors Counsel for the Debtors Kathryn Koorenny, Esq. Stephen Karotkin, Esq. AMR Corporation Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP 4333 Amon Carter Blvd 767 Fifth Avenue MD 5675 New York, NY Fort Worth, TX

6 Pg 6 of 6 Attorneys for Statutory Committee of Unsecured Creditors John Wm. Butler, Jr., Esq. Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP 155 North Wacker Drive Chicago, IL and- Jay M. Goffman, Esq. Four Times Square New York, NY /s/ Denise S. Mondell Denise S. Mondell (DM-8434) Assistant Attorney General 6