Cowden v. Wachovia Securities et al
ORDER denying 21 Motion to Compel Arbitration without prejudice to the defendants' ability to file a properly supported motion demonstrating the existence of jurisdiction to entertain the motion. Signed by Chief Judge William H. Steele on 5/16/2011. Copies to parties. (mpp)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
ANN TIFFIN COWDEN,
WACHOVIA SECURITIES, etc., et al.,
) CIVIL ACTION 11-0112-WS-N
This matter is before the Court on the defendants’ supplemental motion to compel
arbitration and for stay pending arbitration. (Doc. 21). The Court denied a previous
iteration of this motion filed by Wachovia Securities (“Wells Fargo”), (Doc. 3), due in
part to an erroneous understanding that the complaint asserted no claim for breach of
contract. (Doc. 7). Rather than seek reconsideration of that order,1 Wells Fargo filed a
notice of appeal, (Doc. 8), which appeal remains pending.
“The filing of a notice of appeal generally confers jurisdiction on the court of
appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects of the case involved
in the appeal.” In re: Mosley, 494 F.3d 1320, 1328 (11th Cir. 2007) (internal quotes
omitted). Wells Fargo’s pursuit of an appeal would appear to deprive this Court of
jurisdiction to consider the defendants’ supplemental motion to compel arbitration.
Accordingly, the motion is denied, without prejudice to the defendants’ ability to file a
A motion to reconsider is available to correct clear error. E.g., Gibson v. Mattox, 511 F.
Supp. 2d 1182, 1185 (S.D. Ala. 2007). The Court has allowed reconsideration, for example,
when it erroneously stated that the movant had failed to make a particular argument it had in fact
asserted. Dyas v. City of Fairhope, 2010 WL 5477754 at *1 (S.D. Ala. 2010).
properly supported motion demonstrating the existence of jurisdiction to entertain the
DONE and ORDERED this 16th day of May, 2011.
s/ WILLIAM H. STEELE
CHIEF 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?