WALLIS v. KID BRANDS, INC. et al
Filing
2
OPINION. Signed by Judge William J. Martini on 12/15/14. (gh, )
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Docket No.: 14-cv-7179
Scott Wallis,
Appellant,
OPINION
v.
Kid Brands, Inc., et al.,
Appellees.
_____________________________________
In re:
Kid Brands, Inc., et al.,
Debtors.
WILLIAM J. MARTINI, U.S.D.J.:
Before the Court is an unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal of a bankruptcy
order. The bankruptcy is a chapter 11 reorganization of several related corporations
(the “Debtors”), including Sassy LLC. The Appellant is Scott Wallis, a creditor. On
July 28, 2014, the Debtors filed a motion to sell the assets of Sassy LLC (the “Sassy
Sale”). The last date to object to the Sassy Sale was August 4, 2014. On August 4,
Wallis filed a motion requesting an extension of 28 days to file an objection to the
Sassy Sale. Wallis’s reason for requesting the extension was that he was going to
be in Florida for a graduation and to go on vacation from August 3 until August 28.
The Bankruptcy Court denied the motion to extend the deadline and entered an order
authorizing the Sassy Sale. The Sassy Sale closed on August 18. Several days later,
1
Wallis filed a Notice of Appeal of the order denying his motion to extend and of all
subsequent orders. Since then, Wallis has done nothing to prosecute the appeal.
Bankruptcy Rule 8006 provides, in pertinent part, that “[w]ithin 14 days after
filing a notice of appeal as provided by Rule 8001(a) . . . the appellant shall file with
the clerk and serve on the appellee a designation of items to be included in the record
on appeal and a statement of issues to be presented.”
Here, Appellant’s deadline was September 10, 2014. Appellant has made no
efforts to comply with Bankruptcy Rule 8006 or otherwise prosecute this appeal.
Moreover, he has a history of dilatory behavior, as demonstrated by both his failure
to prosecute this appeal and his previous eleventh-hour request to delay the
Bankruptcy Court’s decision about the Sassy Sale so that he could go on a monthlong vacation to another state. As the Appellees note in their brief, the unwinding
of the Sassy Sale now would cause an exceptionally great burden on many parties,
and any argument to undo the Sassy Sale would have to be exceptionally meritorious
in order to be just.
For these reasons, the motion is granted, and the appeal is dismissed. An
appropriate order follows.
/s/ William J. Martini
_____________________________
WILLIAM J. MARTINI, U.S.D.J.
Date: December 16, 2014
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?