Miller v. Schmitz et al
Filing
152
ORDER APPROVING Defendants' Motion to Approve its Security and to STAY Execution of Judgment, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 1/17/14. (Hellings, J)
1
2
3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
4
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
5
6
ISAAC MILLER,
7
8
9
Case No. 1:12-cv-0137 LJO SAB
ORDER APPROVING DEFENDANTS’
MOTION TO APPROVE ITS SECURITY
AND TO STAY EXECUTION OF
JUDGMENT
Plaintiff,
v.
HANFORD POLICE OFFICER STEVE
SCHMITZ, et al.,
10
(Docs. 150 & 151)
Defendants.
11
/
12
13
On January 9, 2014, Defendants Officer Steve Schmitz and the City of Hanford (collectively
14
“Defendants”) moved to stay execution of the Court’s December 2, 2013 judgment and posted a check
15
in the amount of $581,250 as security. In response, the Court noted that Defendants’ submission did
16
not appear to be in full compliance with Local Rule 151. The Court therefore ordered Defendants to
17
correct these deficiencies.
18
On January 16, 2014, Defendants filed an “Amended Agreement for Distribution of Security,”
19
which appears to be in full compliance with Local Rule 151. Accordingly, pursuant to Federal Rule of
20
Civil Procedure 62(d), the Court APPROVES Defendants’ security in lieu of a supersedeas bond and
21
orders a STAY of any execution of the December 2, 2013 judgment until this Court has resolved the
22
pending motion for new trial and, if necessary, any appeal filed by Defendants has been resolved.
23
24
25
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
January 17, 2014
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill
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?