Thomas K. Varkey v. M&T Nationwide, LLC et al.

Varkey · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · March 4, 2026 · No. Civil Action No. 26-1645 (RK); Bankruptcy Action No. 25-22026 (MEH)

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey denied Thomas K. Varkey’s emergency motions for a stay pending appeal and denied his emergency motion to reopen the case as moot. The court held that Varkey failed to meaningfully demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of his appeal from the Bankruptcy Court’s denial of vacatur of orders granting relief from the automatic stay. The court also terminated the pending motions.

Holdings

  1. A stay pending appeal was denied because Varkey failed to demonstrate a strong or significantly better than negligible likelihood of success on the merits, which was a threshold factor sufficient to resolve the motion without analyzing the remaining stay factors.
  2. The appeal did not present a substantial likelihood of success because, once relief from the automatic stay is granted, judicial proceedings against the debtor may continue.
  3. The emergency motion to reopen was denied as moot because the matter had been reopened upon Varkey's payment of the filing fee in the Bankruptcy Court.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Varkey was entitled to a stay pending appeal under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8007(b).
  2. Whether Varkey demonstrated a strong or significantly better than negligible likelihood of success on his appeal from the Bankruptcy Court's orders granting relief from the automatic stay and denying vacatur.
  3. Whether the emergency motion to reopen the district-court case should be denied as moot after Varkey paid the bankruptcy-court filing fee.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (16)

  • Ritzen Grp., Inc. v. Jackson Masonry, LLC, 589 U.S. 35, 37 (2020)(followed)
  • Deshmukh v. U.S. Tr. Off., No. 25-4017, 2025 WL 2663696, at *5 (D.N.J. Sept. 17, 2025)(followed)
  • In re W.R. Grace & Co., 475 B.R. 34, 205 (D. Del. 2012)(followed)
  • In re Revel AC, Inc., 802 F.3d 558, 565, 570-571 (3d Cir. 2015)(followed)
  • In re Forty-Eight Insulations, Inc., 115 F.3d 1294, 1301 (7th Cir. 1997)(followed)
  • S.S. Body Armor I, Inc. v. Carter Ledyard & Milburn LLP, 927 F.3d 763, 775 (3d Cir. 2019)(followed)
  • In re Myers, 491 F.3d 120, 128 (3d Cir. 2007)(followed)
  • In re Maxus Energy Corp., 49 F.4th 223, 229 (3d Cir. 2022)(followed)
  • In re Prosser, 777 F.3d 154, 161 (3d Cir. 2015)(followed)
  • United States v. Green, 617 F.3d 233, 239 (3d Cir. 2010)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 16.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…