Yeager et al v. Bowlin et al

Filing 230

ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 6/2/15 ORDERING that 223 Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs of Collection of Judgment hearing is CONTINUED to 6/29/2015 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 5 (WBS) before Senior Judge William B. Shubb. Def endants shall file a supplemental memorandum addressing the timeliness of their motion for attorneys' fees and costs of collection of judgment on or before 6/8/2015. Plaintiffs shall file a supplemental response addressing the same issue on or before 6/15/2015. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
----oo0oo----

12
13
14

GENERAL CHARLES “CHUCK”
YEAGER, (RET.), and GENERAL
CHUCK YEAGER FOUNDATION,

17
18

ORDER

Plaintiffs,

15
16

CIV. NO. 2:08-102 WBS CKD

v.
CONNIE BOWLIN, et al.,
Defendants.

19
----oo0oo----

20
21

Defendants request an award of expenses incurred to

22

enforce this court’s award of attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant

23

to California’s Enforcement of Judgments Law, Cal. Civ. Proc.

24

Code §§ 680.010, et seq.

25

Charles E. Yeager opposes the motion pro se.

26

(Docket No. 223.)

Plaintiff General
(Docket No. 228.)

The court understands defendants’ motion to request

27

fees and costs associated solely with the enforcement of the

28

court’s June 3, 2010 judgment.

(See Defs.’ Mem. at 3.)
1

1

Defendants say that judgment “has been collected in full.”

2

see also id. at 2 (“Yeager did pay Bowlins the balance of the

3

underlying judgment . . . .”).)

4

(Id.;

These statements suggest the instant motion may be

5

untimely.

See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 685.070(b) (“Before the

6

judgment is fully satisfied but not later than two years after

7

the costs have been incurred, the judgment creditor claiming

8

costs under this section shall file a memorandum of costs

9

. . . .”), 685.080(a) (“The motion shall be made before the

10

judgment is satisfied in full, but not later than two years after

11

the costs have been incurred.”); see also Carnes v. Zamani, 488

12

F.3d 1057, 1059-61 (9th Cir. 2007) (affirming the denial of a

13

similar motion as untimely).

However, neither party discusses

14

this issue in their briefing.

In order to ensure a thorough

15

adjudication of this matter involving a pro se party, the court

16

will continue the hearing set for this motion and invites both

17

parties to file supplemental briefs addressing the timeliness of

18

defendants’ motion.

19

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

20

(1)

21
22

The hearing currently scheduled for June 15, 2015,
is CONTINUED to June 29, 2015, at 2 p.m.;

(2)

Defendants shall file a supplemental memorandum

23

addressing the timeliness of their motion for

24

attorneys’ fees and costs of collection of

25

judgment on or before June 8, 2015;

26

(3)

Plaintiffs shall file a supplemental response

27

addressing the same issue on or before June 15,

28

2015.
2

1

Dated:

June 2, 2015

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3