Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 25, 2019

Garcia v. 3662 Broadway Restaurant Corp.

Judge
Stewart Aaron
Docket
1:19-cv-08297-SDA
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
BankruptcyCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Garcia v. 3662 Broadway Restaurant Corp., Judge Ramos stayed defendants’ motion pending resolution of the same motion in a related case.

Who this affects

The stay affected the defendants’ motion in this case and postponed its resolution while the same motion was resolved in the related case.

What happened

In Garcia v. 3662 Broadway Restaurant Corp., defendants 3662 Broadway Restaurant Corp. and Albertico Chavez asked the court to stay the action after Chavez filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy protection. The company argued that the bankruptcy stay should also protect it because Chavez wholly owned it and a judgment against the company could affect his bankruptcy estate.

The defendants relied on differing decisions about whether a bankruptcy stay can protect a non-bankrupt company owned by an individual who filed for bankruptcy. The opinion does not state that the court resolved that legal issue.

Judge Edgardo Ramos stayed the motion pending resolution of the same motion in the related case Lopez v. 3662 Broadway Restaurant Corp., No. 19 Civ. 975, Doc. 24.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Garcia v. 3662 Broadway Restaurant Corp. · No. 1:19-cv-08297-SDA
Judge
Stewart Aaron
Date
Nov. 25, 2019

Background

Defendants 3662 Broadway Restaurant Corp., doing business as Taqueria San Pedro, and Albertico Chavez asked the court to issue an automatic stay. Their attorney stated that Chavez had filed a voluntary Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition on November 20, 2019, in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. The attorney also stated that Chavez wholly owned 3662 Broadway Restaurant Corp.

The corporate defendant argued that the bankruptcy stay should apply to it as well. It relied on a Second Circuit decision holding that a bankruptcy stay had protected a non-bankrupt corporation wholly owned by an individual debtor when deciding a claim against the corporation would immediately harm the debtor economically. The letter also discussed conflicting district and bankruptcy court views about whether that principle applies when the individual files under Chapter 13.

Ruling

Judge Edgardo Ramos endorsed the motion with the following disposition: “This motion is STAYED pending resolution of the same motion in the related case Lopez v. 3662 Broadway Restaurant Corp., 19 Civ. 975, Doc. 24.” The opinion therefore stayed the motion; it did not state that the court decided whether the bankruptcy stay extends to the corporate defendant or otherwise resolve the underlying dispute.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.