Montoya v. Miami-Dade Police Department et al
Filing
85
ORDER granting 84 Expedited Motion. Signed by Judge Darrin P. Gayles on 3/26/2024. See attached document for full details. (aci)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 1:23-cv-20359-GAYLES
ANDRES FELIPE MONTOYA,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN HERNANDEZ,
Defendant.
__________________________________/
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S EXPEDITED MOTION TO STAY CASE
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant Officer John Hernandez’s Expedited
Motion to Stay Case Pending a Decision by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals [ECF No. 84].
On March 21, 2024, this Court denied Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings under
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c), ruling, as relevant here, that it could not incorporate by reference Defendant’s
body-worn camera (“BWC”) footage attached to his Answer because Plaintiff did not refer to the
footage in his Amended Complaint. [ECF No. 81 at 6–10]. Defendant points out that in Johnson
v. City of Atlanta, No. 1:21-CV-01977-JPB, 2022 WL 836300, at *1–2 (N.D. Ga. Mar. 21, 2022),
appeal docketed, No. 22-11359 (11th Cir. Apr. 18, 2022), the Eleventh Circuit plans to address
that precise issue: whether a court may consider video footage attached to an answer under the
incorporation-by-reference doctrine even if the plaintiff did not explicitly reference the footage in
his complaint. [ECF No. 84 ¶¶ 2–5]. Defendant asks this Court to stay this case until the Eleventh
Circuit decides Johnson, as that decision may warrant reconsideration of this Court’s denial of
Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Id. ¶¶ 7–10.
“The District Court has broad discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its power to
control its own docket.” Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997) (citation omitted); see also
Johnson v. Bd. of Regents of Univ. of Ga., 263 F.3d 1234, 1269 (11th Cir. 2001) (“[W]e accord
district courts broad discretion over the management of pre-trial activities, including discovery and
scheduling.” (alteration added; citations omitted)). Indeed, “[t]he inherent discretionary authority
of the district court to stay litigation pending the outcome of [a] related proceeding in another
forum is not questioned.” CTI-Container Leasing Corp. v. Uiterwyk Corp., 685 F.2d 1284, 1288
(11th Cir. 1982) (alterations added; citations omitted). Finally, in the “interest of judicial
economy,” courts can “order a stay of [a] proceeding pending the outcome of [an] appeal.” Lozman
v. City of Riviera Beach, No. 08-CV-80134-DMM, 2011 WL 13107422, at *4 (S.D. Fla. May 4,
2011) (alterations added).
Here, the Court finds that a stay is warranted because the issue before the Eleventh Circuit
in Johnson “is nearly the same as the central question in this case.” Glover v. LM Gen. Ins. Co.,
No. 19-CV-21900-CMA, 2019 WL 7945690, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 4, 2019). Therefore, “the
Eleventh Circuit’s decision is likely to provide guidance on the issues presented here” and “the
stay requested is not indefinite” because “[t]he appeal [in Johnson] is fully briefed.” Id., at *2–3.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. This case is STAYED pending the Eleventh Circuit’s decision in Johnson v. City of
Atlanta, No. 22-11359. All pending deadlines are hereby STAYED pending the
resolution of Johnson.
2. Defendant shall notify the Court within 14 days of the date the Eleventh Circuit issues
its decision in Johnson.
3. Defendant may move for reconsideration, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), of the Court’s
order denying Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings within 28 days of
the date the Eleventh Circuit decides Johnson.
-2-
4. This case is ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED, for statistical purposes only, without
prejudice to the substantive rights of any of the parties.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 26th day of March, 2024.
_______________________________
DARRIN P. GAYLES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
cc:
Counsel of Record via CM/ECF
Andres Felipe Montoya, pro se
M25966
Moore Haven Correctional Facility
Inmate Mail/Parcels
Post Office Box 719001
Moore Haven, FL 33471
-3-
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?