Weller v. Finger

Filing 186

ORDER GRANTING Dft's 183 Rule 58(e) Motion for Order that Pending Request for Attorney's Fees Have Same Effect as Rule 59 Motion Upon Time for Appeal & GRANTING Dft's 182 Motion for Reconsideration of Order Releasing Funds, Etc. [ 181] Order releasing funds deposited w/the court is AMENDED to permit the release of only $100,000.00 of those funds, w/accrued interest, to Plf. The other $300,000.00 is to be retained in an interest bearing acct. pending resolution of any appeal. The pending request for attny's fees shall have the same effect, under FRAP 54(a)(4), as a timely motion under Rule 59, FRCP, as set out. Signed by Judge Callie V. S. Granade on 4/5/10. (tot)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION THOMAS C. WELLER, JR., Plaintiff, v. VAN P. FINGER, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 08-00240-CG-C ORDER This matter is before the court on defendant's Rule 58(e) Motion for Order that Pending Request for Attorneys' Fees Have Same Effect as Rule 59 Motion Upon Time for Appeal (Doc. 183) and defendant's Motion for Reconsideration of Order Releasing Funds. Etc. (Doc. 182). Having considered the motions and the premises therefore, they are GRANTED, to the extent that the court's previous Order (Doc. 181) releasing the funds deposited with the court is AMENDED to permit the release of only $100,000.00 of those funds, with accrued interest, to plaintiff. The other $300,000.00 is to be retained in an interest bearing account pending resolution of any appeal. In addition, the court ORDERS that pursuant to Rule 58(e), F. R. Civ. P., the pending request for attorneys' fees shall have the same effect, under F.R.A.P. 4(a)(4), as a timely motion under Rule 59, F. R. Civ. P. DONE and ORDERED this 5th day of April, 2010. /s/ Callie V. S. Granade UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?