Davis v. Prison Health Services, Inc. et al

Filing 267

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STAY EXECUTION OF THE JUDGMENT PENDING RESOLUTION OF POST-TRIAL MOTIONS (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 2/22/2012)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

FREDDIE M. DAVIS,

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

No. C 09-2629 SI

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’
MOTION TO STAY EXECUTION OF
THE JUDGMENT PENDING
RESOLUTION OF POST-TRIAL
MOTIONS

v.
PRISON HEALTH SERVICES, et al.,

12

Defendants.

/

13
On February 17, 2012, the Court held a hearing on various post-trial motions, as well as

14
15

defendants’ motion to stay execution of the judgment pending resolution of the post-trial motions.

16

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(b), a court may, in its discretion, stay execution of a

17

money judgment pending resolution of post-trial motions. Plaintiff does not oppose defendants’ motion

18

to stay. However, plaintiff contends that defendants should supply a bond for the security of the

19

judgment in the amount of $528,000 because Alameda County has not shown that it is fully solvent and

20

able to immediately satisfy the full judgment amount.

21

Declaration of Janette Brook, a Senior Risk and Insurance Analyst for the County of Alameda. Ms.

22

Brook states, inter alia, that “the County, by and through a risk sharing pool, has the resources to satisfy

23

the judgment, if, at the end of the case, there is any judgment owed by defendant Ayala.” Brook Decl.

24

¶ 2.

However, defendants have submitted the

25

The Court has discretion to stay execution of judgment pending appeal without requiring a bond.

26

See Federal Prescription Serv. v. American Pharmaceutical Ass’n, 636 F.2d 755, 759-61 (D.C. Cir.

27

1980). Based upon the declaration of Ms. Brook, the Court is satisfied that the County has the resources

28

to pay the judgment. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS defendants’ motion to stay enforcement of the

1

judgment pending resolution of the post-trial motions. Docket No. 200.

2
3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

4
5

Dated: February 22, 2012
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2