Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. v. Universal American Mortgage Company, LLC

Filing 99

ORDER re: 98 Unopposed Motion to Stay. Plaintiff's Amended and Unopposed Motion Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 62 To Stay Proceedings Related to Defendant's Award of Costs Pending Resolution of Plaintiff's Appeal [# 98 ], filed May 14, 2014, is provisionally GRANTED. Plaintiff SHALL DEPOSIT into the registry of the court a supersedeas bond in the amount of $13,200. Once the bond is posted, the proceedings to consider and determine defendant's award of costs are STAYED pending resolution of the appeal. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 5/16/2014.(klyon, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn

Civil Action No. 13-cv-00091-REB-KMT
LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNIVERSAL AMERICAN MORTGAGE COMPANY, LLC,
Defendant.

ORDER RE: UNOPPOSED MOTION TO STAY
Blackburn, J.
The matter before me is Plaintiff’s Amended and Unopposed Motion
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 62 To Stay Proceedings Related to Defendant’s Award
of Costs Pending Resolution of Plaintiff’s Appeal [#98],1 filed May 14, 2014. By this
motion, plaintiff seeks a stay of determination of defendant’s award of costs until the
appeal is resolved. Despite earlier opposition, defendant has now conceded the relief
requested by the motion. I grant the motion contingent on plaintiff’s posting of the
required supersedeas bond as set forth in more detail herein.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(d) provides that,
[i]f an appeal is taken, the appellant may obtain a stay by
supersedeas bond, except in an action described in Rule
62(a)(1) or (2). The bond may be given upon or after filing the
notice of appeal or after obtaining the order allowing the appeal.
1

“[#98]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a
specific paper by the court’s electronic case management and case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this
convention throughout this order.

The stay takes effect when the court approves the bond.
A stay is a matter of right so long as the appellant files a supersedeas bond. Metz v.
United States, 130 F.R.D. 458, 459 (D. Kan. March 27, 1990). “The purpose of a
supersedeas bond is to secure an appellee from loss resulting from the stay of
execution, and a full supersedeas bond should be the requirement in normal
circumstances.” United States ex rel. Sun Construction. Co. v. Torix General
Contractors, LLC, 2011 WL 2182897 at *1 (D. Colo. June 6, 2011) (citations and
internal quotation marks omitted). “District Courts have inherent discretionary authority
in setting supersedeas bonds.” Id.
Plaintiff’s motion does not address the issue of the supersedeas bond at all.
Nevertheless, “[t]he general rule is for the district court to set a supersedeas bond in the
full amount of the judgment plus interest, costs, and damages for delay. It is incumbent
upon the moving party to objectively demonstrate good cause for any departure from
this general rule.” Metz, 130 F.R.D. at 459. This amount therefore properly includes an
award of approximate costs that may be incurred on appeal. See Sun Construction
Co., 2011 WL 2182897 at *3.
Defendant has filed its bill of costs [#84], in which it seeks $8,809.13 in costs.
Given the complex and novel issues presented by this case, it strikes this court that
defendant could incur costs of at least half that much on appeal. The court therefore
will order plaintiff to post a supersedeas bond in the amount of $13,200 to preserve
defendant’s rights pending appeal.

2

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That Plaintiff’s Amended and Unopposed Motion Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
P. 62 To Stay Proceedings Related to Defendant’s Award of Costs Pending
Resolution of Plaintiff’s Appeal [#98], filed May 14, 2014, is provisionally GRANTED;
2. That plaintiff SHALL DEPOSIT into the registry of the court, in accordance
with Fed. R. Civ. P. 67 and D.C.COLO.LCivR 67.2, a supersedeas bond in the amount
of $13,200; and
3. That once the bond is posted, the proceedings to consider and determine
defendant’s award of costs are STAYED pending resolution of the appeal.
Dated May 16, 2014, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

3