Session v. Moroe, 622 B.R. 102

Debtor O’Neal Session filed Chapter 13 on November 23, 2018; her sole scheduled asset was a 2015 Honda Civic subject to Honda Finance's security interest.
Honda repossessed and sold the Civic post-petition; Session sued in Adversary No. 18-65 for violation of the automatic stay and obtained partial summary judgment on liability; damages trial was scheduled.
Session moved to withdraw the reference and sought appellate review; she requested stays that paused the adversary proceedings.
The Chapter 13 Trustee moved to dismiss (no assets/claims after Honda reduced its claim to zero); the bankruptcy was dismissed pre-confirmation on November 15, 2019.
The District Court denied Session’s motion to withdraw the reference; the Eleventh Circuit dismissed her appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Session moved to stay the dismissal/order under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8007; the bankruptcy court denied the stay on November 25, 2020 and ordered the adversary matters to proceed (damages hearing to be set and other motions scheduled).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether to stay the bankruptcy dismissal and related adversary proceedings pending appeal	Session sought a stay under Rule 8007 to obtain direct appellate review and to pause proceedings	Opposing parties argued no basis for stay: no pending/non-fruitful appeal and dismissal appropriate	Denied — no pending appeal or viable appeal path; stay is unwarranted
Likelihood of success on appeal (threshold factor)	Session contended dismissal was improper and she would succeed on appeal	Courts/counsel pointed to District Court and Eleventh Circuit rulings denying withdrawal/certification and dismissing appeal for lack of jurisdiction	Denied — Session failed to show a probable likelihood of success on the merits
Irreparable harm absent a stay	Session implied prejudice from dismissal and delay of relief	Opponents noted the only remedy is monetary damages for repossession/disposition; no ongoing collection or property jeopardy	Denied — no irreparable harm established; harm is compensable in money
Public interest and prejudice to others from a stay	Session argued for delay to preserve appellate rights	Opponents emphasized docket efficiency, wasted resources, and that a Chapter 13 with no debts/assets serves no reorganization purpose	Denied — public interest favors prompt resolution; stay would unduly delay proceedings

Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009) (stay pending appeal is not of right; issuance is discretionary and extraordinary)
Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248 (1936) (stay of proceedings rests in court's discretion)
Sampson v. Murray, 415 U.S. 61 (1974) (irreparable injury standard for preliminary relief and stays)
Touchston v. McDermott, 234 F.3d 1130 (11th Cir. 2000) (factors for stays and preliminary relief)
Garcia–Mir v. Meese, 781 F.2d 1450 (11th Cir. 1986) (likelihood of success on the merits as a prerequisite for a stay)
City Nat’l Bank of Miami v. Gen. Coffee Corp., 758 F.2d 1406 (11th Cir. 1985) (orders of bankruptcy courts are generally not directly appealable to the circuit)
In re Revel AC, Inc., 802 F.3d 558 (3d Cir. 2015) (application of stay factors in bankruptcy appeals)