Taylor v. Winnecour (In Re Taylor), 450 B.R. 577

Debtor filed an emergency motion for stay pending appeal of the court's April 29, 2011 order denying dismissal of her Chapter 13 case.
A four-factor test governs stays pending appeal: likelihood of success on merits, irreparable injury, substantial harm to others, and public interest.
Court concluded Debtor has little likelihood of success on the merits due to egregious delays and pending fraudulent conveyance action that may return assets to pay creditors in full.
Debtor would not suffer irreparable injury from denial of a stay because litigation continues regardless of bankruptcy status.
A stay would substantially harm creditors and the estate, delaying ongoing discovery and adjudication of fraudulent conveyance and other actions.
Public interest weighs against a stay because it would perpetuate delays in creditor payment and clog the system.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Likelihood of success on appeal	Taylor argues for dismissal on appeal as of right	Winnecour contends no absolute right to dismiss; egregious conduct blocks dismissal	Debtor unlikely to succeed on merits
irreparable injury if stay denied	Taylor would suffer irreparable harm from delays	Taylor would not suffer irreparable injury; actions proceed regardless	No irreparable injury shown
Impact on other parties if stay granted	Stay would not harm creditors; would aid administration	Stay would substantially harm creditors and estate by delaying proceedings	Stay would substantially harm other parties
Public interest in grant of stay	Stay serves public interest by orderly resolution	Public interest weighs against meritless appeals delaying payments	Public interest does not favor a stay

In re Adelphia Communications Corp., 361 B.R. 337 (S.D.N.Y. 2007) (four-factor stay standard and considerations for corporate reorganizations)
In re Roth American, Inc., 90 B.R. 94 (Bankr.M.D.Pa.1988) (bankruptcy stay principles and balancing factors)