In Re: Neelam Taneja

Debtor: Neelam Taneja
Appellant: Neelam Taneja
Appellee: Jeffrey L. Sapir
Case Number: 1:2017cv09429
Filed: December 1, 2017
Court: New York Southern District Court
Office: Foley Square Office
Presiding Judge: John G. Koeltl
Nature of Suit: Appeal
Cause of Action: 28:0158
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
November 1, 2018 33 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER re: 29 MOTION MOTION FOR REHEARING re: 22 Memorandum & Opinion, filed by Neelam Taneja. The motion for reconsideration is denied. The Clerk is directed to close the motion at Docket Number 29 and to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 10/31/18) (yv)
October 23, 2018 28 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER re: 27 MOTION to Stay, filed by Neelam Taneja. Because Taneja has not shown that any of the four relevant factors weigh in favor of a stay, Taneja's motion for a stay is denied. Taneja may file a motion for a stay before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 8 (a) (2) (A) (ii). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 10/23/18) (yv)
October 15, 2018 26 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER re: 18 MOTION for Reconsideration, filed by Neelam Taneja. This Court never issued an indicative ruling under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 12.1. On August 29, 2018, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued an Order holding the appellant's pending appeal in abeyance until a final ruling on the appellant's motion for reconsideration was issued. Because the appellant did not file any additional materials supporting her appeal of the bankruptcy c ourt's decision, her motion for reconsideration is denied. See Davidson v. Scully, 172 F. Supp. 2d 458, 461 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) ("A motion for reconsideration will generally be denied unless the moving party can point to controlling decisions o r data that the court overlooked -- matters, in other words, that might reasonably be expected to alter the conclusion reached by the court"). Well after the June 15 deadline, the appellant filed a proposed order that would discharge her debt un der 11 U.S.C. § 727. That proposed order is without basis and does not support her motion for reconsideration. Therefore, the Court declines to sign the proposed order. The Clerk is directed to close all pending motions and to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 10/15/18) (yv)
May 25, 2018 22 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER re: 18 MOTION for Reconsideration. filed by Neelam Taneja. Because the appellant has filed an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, this Court lacks jurisdiction to modify the March 21, 2018, M emorandum Opinion & Order. See United States v. Rodgers, 101 F.3d 247, 251 (2d Cir. 1996). The appellant is nevertheless invited to file in this Court by June 15, 2018, any additional materials with respect to her appeal from the bankruptcy court� 39;s order. At that point, if the appellant's additional materials render her appeal meritorious, the Court may issue an order requesting that the Court of Appeals remand the matter to this Court so that the Court may modify the judgment. If th e appellant's additional materials do not render her appeal meritorious, the Court may instead deny her motion for reconsideration without waiting for the result of the appeal in the Court of Appeals in the interest of judicial economy and as further set forth in this Opinion. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 5/24/18) (yv)
March 21, 2018 15 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER re: 14 MOTION to Stay filed by Neelam Taneja, 6 MOTION to Stay filed by Neelam Taneja. Accordingly, the order dismissing Taneja's Chapter 13 petition is affirmed. Taneja also moves for a stay pend ing appeal. Because this Memorandum Opinion and Order resolves Taneja's appeal, her motion for a stay is denied as moot. The Clerk is directed to close all pending motions and to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 3/21/2018) (mml)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: In Re: Neelam Taneja
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Debtor: Neelam Taneja
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Appellant: Neelam Taneja
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Appellee: Jeffrey L. Sapir
Represented By: Jeffrey L. Sapir
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?