These factors as applied to this case do not support a finding of excusable neglect. Determination of this claim has a significant impact on the progress of this case. Of particular significance to the court is that a delay in adjudication of the SBE's claim will continue to preclude the debtor from proposing and confirming a chapter 11 plan, which delay will prejudice the debtor as well as all other creditors of the estate. The SBE cited as the reason for its delay in filing a notice of appeal "the press of other business." However, the Court notes that the SBE instructed its counsel to file a notice of appeal prior to the expiration of the 10-day appeal period. In Pioneer Investment, the Supreme Court, in addressing the issue of culpability of counsel, gave little weight to the fact that counsel in that case was experiencing an upheaval in his law practice at the time of the claims bar date. Counsel cited a "major and significant disruption in his professional life caused by his withdrawal from his former law firm." Instead, the Court focused on the inadequacy of the notice itself in making its finding of the absence of counsel's culpability. Notwithstanding the unsupported assertions of debtor's counsel, the Court does not find any indication of bad faith on the part of the SBE. Moreover, the SBE is not likely to be prejudiced because, in view of the Ninth CIrcuit's recent ruling in MacFarlane, 96 CDOS 3363 (9th Cir. 5/13/96), the SBE is unlikely to prevail on appeal.

Based on these reasons, the SBE's motion must be denied.

NOTE: File also available in PDF format. To view the PDF file, click the icon below.
Original filed May 14, 1996	File Size: 10 Kbytes