Prato et al v. Hacienda Del Mar, LLC

Filing 154

ORDER denying without prejudice 153 Motion For Issuance of Writ of Garnishment After Judgment. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 6/22/2011. (LMH)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
GARY PRATO; JOANNE C. MCMURRAY,
Plaintiffs,
-vs-

Case No. 2:08-cv-883-FtM-29SPC

HACIENDA DEL MAR, LLC a Florida Limited
Liability Company,
Defendant,
And
BERNTSSON, ITTERSAGEN, GUNDERSON
WAKSLER & WIDEIKIS, LP, TRUST
ACCOUNT,
Garnishee.
______________________________________

ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendant, Hacienda Del Mar, LLC.’s Motion For
Issuance of Writ of Garnishment After Judgment (Doc. #153) filed on June 17, 2011. The Defendant
received a favorable judgment against the Plaintiffs, Gray Prato and JoAnne C. McMurray, in the
amount of $353,549.00. On March 14, 2011, judgment was entered against the Plaintiff. In an an
attempt to collect on the judgment, the Defendant now moves for a writ of garnishment against the
named garnishees Berntsson, Ittersagen, Gunderson Waksler & Wideikis, LP.
On April 14, 2011, the Plaintiff filed a Motion to Stay Execution of Judgment. (Doc. #142).
The Motion to Stay Execution of Judgment contained a Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 50, Rule 59, and Rule
60 request. Pursuant to Rule 62(b), a court “may stay the execution of a judgment - or any

proceedings to enforce it - pending disposition” of such Motions. Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(b). In this
instance, the Defendant’s Motion for a Writ of Garnishment is contingent on the District Court’s
ruling on the Post-Judgment Motion to Stay Execution of Judgement (Doc. #142). Therefore, the
Court cannot grant the requested relief until the District Court resolves the outstanding Motion for
Stay of Execution.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
Motion For Issuance of Writ of Garnishment After Judgment (Doc. #153) is DENIED
without prejudice.
DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this

Copies: Defendants Counsel

-2-

22nd

day of June, 2011.