Rienzi & Sons, Inc. v. N. Puglisi & F. Industria Paste Alimentari S.P.A. et al

Filing 100

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 98 Motion to Compel. In light of the bankruptcy stay, Puglisi's motion to compel is denied without prejudice. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Roanne L. Mann on 3/4/2015. (Williams, Jennifer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
---------------------------------------------------------------x
RIENZI & SONS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
-against-

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
08-CV-2540 (DLI)

N. PUGLISI & F. INDUSTRIA PASTE
ALIMENTARI S.P.A.,
Defendant.
---------------------------------------------------------------x
ROANNE L. MANN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE:
In a letter-motion filed this past Monday evening, defendant/counterclaim plaintiff N.
Puglisi & F. Industria Paste Alimentari S.P.A. (“Puglisi”) moved to compel
plaintiff/counterclaim defendant Rienzi & Sons, Inc. (“Rienzi”), and its principal, Michael
Rienzi (a non-party), to comply with three discovery demands served on February 17, 2015,
after the Honorable Dora L. Irizzary, the district judge presiding over this case, entered
judgment against Rienzi in the amount of $1,687,342.56. See First Motion to Compel (Mar.
2, 2015) (“Puglisi Mot.”), Electronic Case Filing (“ECF”) Docket Entry (“DE”) #98; see also
Judgment (Feb. 17, 2015), DE #96. The discovery sought by Puglisi is reportedly relevant to
the satisfaction of the judgment. Puglisi argues that, contrary to Rienzi’s contention, the
automatic fourteen-day stay triggered by Rule 62(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
does not apply to post-judgment discovery. See Puglisi Mot. at 2-3 (collecting cases). In any
event, Puglisi observes, that fourteen-day period expired no later than March 3, 2015. See id.
at 3. Puglisi therefore has requested an order compelling responses to the discovery demands
by today (March 4) and the scheduling of a contempt hearing. See id.

Yesterday evening, Rienzi filed a letter opposing Puglisi’s motion. See Reply in
Opposition (Mar. 3, 2015) (“Rienzi Opp.”), DE #99. Rienzi counters that the discovery
demands were in fact stayed under Rule 62(a), see Rienzi Opp. at 2-3 (collecting cases), and
that the matter has now been stayed pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362, on account of Rienzi’s filing
last night of a voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition in this district. See Rienzi Opp. at 5.
The Court declines to render an advisory opinion on the parties’ dispute as to the
applicability of Rule 62(a). That dispute has been rendered academic by two separate
intervening events: the expiration of the fourteen-day stay under Rule 62(a), and the
commencement of the automatic bankruptcy stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362.
In light of the bankruptcy stay, Puglisi’s motion to compel is denied without prejudice.
SO ORDERED.
Dated:

Brooklyn, New York
March 4, 2015

Roanne L. Mann

/s/
ROANNE L. MANN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

-2-