Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Cuker Interactive, LLC

Filing 488

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 485 Motion to Stay. See Order for details. Signed by Honorable Timothy L. Brooks on August 11, 2017. (jch)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION WAL-MART STORES, INC. V. PLAINTIFF/ COUNTER-DEFENDANT CASE NO. 5:14-CV-5262 CUKER INTERACTIVE, LLC DEFENDANT/ COUNTER-CLAIMANT ORDER STAYING EXECUTION ON MONEY JUDGMENT Currently before the Court is Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.’s (“Walmart”) Motion for Stay of Execution on Money Judgment (Doc. 485). On July 28, 2017, the Court entered Judgment in favor of Cuker Interactive, LLC (“Cuker”) against Walmart in the amount of $10,197,065.00. See Doc. 484. Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(a), execution on that Judgment is automatically stayed “until 14 days have passed after its entry.” Today is the fourteenth day since Judgment was entered. Walmart has asked the Court to extend the stay of execution through the resolution of post-judgment motions that Walmart intends to file under Rules 50, 52(b), 59, and/or 60, and pending appeal. Rule 62(b) authorizes this Court to stay execution of a judgment pending disposition of the aforementioned postjudgment motions “[o]n appropriate terms for the opposing party’s security,” and Rule 62(d) authorizes a stay pending appeal by supersedeas bond. Walmart has presented the Court with the form of a supersedeas bond in the amount of $12,000,000.00, see Doc. 485-1, but in the interest of judicial economy Walmart asks that the Court “waive the bond until the remaining post-trial motions are decided and a final judgment amount is set,” see Doc. 485, ¶ 4. The Court finds that 1 Walmart plainly has the ability to pay the judgment, such that a supersedeas bond is not necessary to protect Cuker’s interest during post-judgment motion practice. See Fox v. Pittsburg State Univ., 319 F.R.D. 342, 343 (D. Kan. 2017). The Court further finds that the matter of whether to enter a stay pending appeal is not yet ripe for consideration. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Walmart’s Motion for Stay of Execution on Money Judgment (Doc. 485) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: execution and other proceedings to enforce the money judgment are STAYED pending disposition of Walmart’s post-judgment motions, and security for that stay is waived. Walmart’s request for a stay of execution pending appeal is denied without prejudice, and may be renewed when and if an appeal is taken. IT IS SO ORDERED on this 11th day of August, 2017. _/s/ Timothy L. Brooks______________ TIMOTHY L. BROOKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?