While debtor's chapter 13 case was pending, prepetition sellers of a business to debtor filed suit in state court against debtor and the sale brokers, alleging fraud in connection with the sale. Brokers sought relief from the bankruptcy stay in order to file a claim for indemnity against debtor, arguing that the indemnity claim did not arise until brokers were sued by sellers and, therefore, it was a postpetition claim that is not subject to the 11 U.S.C. § 362 stay. The court rejected the reasoning in Avellino & Bienes v. M. Frenville Co., Inc. (In re M. Frenville Co., Inc.), 744 F.2d 332 (3rd Cir. 1984) cert. denied, 105 S.Ct. 911 (1985), upon which brokers relied, based on the Bankruptcy Code's inclusion of "contingent" and "unmatured" in the definition of "claim" in 11 U.S.C. § 101(4). The court further held that the Bankruptcy Code also provides an alternate remedy in 11 U.S.C. § 523 for claimants that were unaware of their claims prepetition, which provides that the debtor's discharge does not extend to debts that are not listed or scheduled in time to permit a timely proof of claim. Concluding that brokers' claim against debtor was covered by the automatic stay, and that no cause had been shown for lifting it, the court denied brokers' motion.