Short answer. Yes, in limited circumstances. Under Rule 86, Section 2, a creditor who missed the original filing window may still ask the court to allow a late claim, filed before any order of distribution, if there is good cause and the court sets equitable terms, capped at one additional month.
What the law says
at any time before an order of distribution is entered, on application of a creditor who has failed to file his claim within the time previously limited, the court may, for cause shown and on such terms as are equitable, allow such claim to be filed within a time not exceeding one month
Rule 86, Section 2 — Time within which claims shall be filed. Read the full provision →
The original filing window, and the exception to it
When an estate is settled through probate or intestate proceedings, the court fixes a period for creditors to file claims against the estate, and Rule 86, Section 2 sets that period at not more than twelve nor less than six months after the notice is first published. Miss that window and the ordinary rule is that the claim is barred. But the same section carves out a narrow exception: at any time before an order of distribution is entered, on application of a creditor who has failed to file his claim within the time previously limited, the court may, for cause shown and on such terms as are equitable, allow such claim to be filed within a time not exceeding one month.
Two conditions that have to be met
This is not an automatic second chance. First, timing: the estate must not yet have reached an order of distribution — once the court has ordered the assets divided among the heirs, this door closes. Second, cause: you have to show the court a reason for missing the original deadline, and the statute leaves what counts as sufficient cause to the court's judgment rather than listing it out. A late claim that clears both hurdles is still not filed on the same footing as one filed on time; the court sets its own terms for allowing it, described in the rule as terms that are equitable given the circumstances.
The one-month ceiling
Even where the court is satisfied that cause exists, the extension it can grant is capped: filing is allowed within a time not exceeding one month from when the court permits it. That is a hard outer limit on the relief itself, separate from the six-to-twelve month window that applied originally. If a creditor lets that extra month pass too, the rule offers no further extension on its own terms. Because the whole exception turns on a discretionary finding of cause and an already-tight one-month clock, a creditor who has missed the deadline should raise the request with the settlement court as soon as the reason for the delay is known, rather than waiting.