Nassar et al v. Jackson et al
ORDER denying without prejudice 111 Plaintiff's Motion for Issuance of Writs as premature. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 2/5/2013. (jak)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
RAY NASSAR and GENA SMITH,
EARNESTINE JACKSON, individually
and in her official capacity as a Hughes
School Board Member, ET AL.
NO: 3:11CV00133 SWW
This action came on for trial on January 14, 2013. On January 24, 2013, pursuant to jury
verdicts rendered on January 22, 2013, the Court entered judgment in plaintiffs’ favor against
defendants Hughes School District, Earnestine Jackson, and Jimmy Wilkins. Now before the
Court is plaintiffs’ motion for “issuance of writs of execution on the 15th day after judgment.”
Docket entry #111. After careful consideration, and for reasons that follow, the Court finds that
the motion should be denied, without prejudice, as premature.
In support of their motion, plaintiffs state that during a Hughes School Board (“Board”)
meeting on January 28, 2013, the Board voted to appeal from the judgment in this case.
Plaintiffs state: “Although counsel for the Board stated in the meeting that the District could post
a supersedeas bond, Plaintiffs disagree.” Docket entry #111, ¶ 2. Plaintiffs report that if
defendants fail to post a supersedeas bond, plaintiffs will commence execution of the judgment
on “2/7/13 to prevent the anticipated transfer of funds and alienation of assets by those
individual Defendants.” Id., ¶ 3. Plaintiffs “request that before any supersedeas is accepted by
the Court to stay execution, they have the opportunity to inquire fully into the facts, to assure
themselves of the validity and availability of the monies represented in the supersedeas.” Id., ¶
4. Plaintiffs further request that “[a]s to any portion of the judgment not superseded, and in
accordance with Rule 69(a)(1)” the Court order the clerk to issue separate writs of execution
against all defendants who fail to post supersedeas bonds.
The Court finds that plaintiffs’ motion is premature. Pursuant to Rules 62(a) and 70(d)
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, plaintiffs may apply to the Clerk of the Court for writs
of execution, which may not issue until 14 days after entry of the judgment. In the event that
defendants appeal the judgment and seek a stay by supersedeas bond under Rule 62(d), plaintiffs
will have an opportunity to state their objections. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that
plaintiffs’ motion for issuance of writs of execution (docket entry #111) is denied, without
prejudice, as premature.
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013.
/s/Susan Webber Wright
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?