The Coastal Bank v. Martin et al
Filing
78
ORDER granting 69 Motion for Writ; denying 72 Motion to Stay; finding as moot 75 Motion for Bond. Signed by Judge William T. Moore, Jr on 8/31/17. (jlm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
AMERIS BANK,
Plaintiff
and
Counter-
Defendant,
CASE NO. CV414-038
V.
G. GLEN
MARTIN
and ARTHUR G.
SCANLAN,
and
Defendants
20X1.
Counter-
Plaintiffs
Deputy Clerk
ORDER
Before
Writ
of
the
Court
Execution
are
(Doc.
Plaintiff
69)
and
Ameris
Motion
Bank's
for
Motion
Supersedeas
for
Bond
(Doc. 75), and Defendants G. Glen Martin and Arthur G. Scanlan's
Rule 62(b) Motion for Stay of Enforcement of Judgment Pending
Appeal (Doc. 72). In this case, the
Plaintiff's
Motion
for
Summary
Court previously granted
Judgment
and
determined
that
Defendants were liable for the personal guarantees they signed
securing promissory notes obtained from Plaintiff in favor of
Sterling
Defendants
addition,
Bluff
Investors,
were
the
both
Court
LLC
passive
has
("SBI").
investors
previously
(Doc.
in
denied
Defendants to stay this case. (Id.; Doc. 70.)
38
SBI.
two
at
2.)
(Id.
In
attempts
by
In their most recent Motion to Stay (Doc. 72), Defendants
attempt
to
invoke
Federal
Rule
of
Civil
Procedure
62(b)
to
prevent Plaintiff from enforcing the Court's judgment in this
case,
which
found
$1,817,211.00
and
Defendants
Martin
$1,163,013.00,
and
Scanlan
respectively
liable
(Doc.
for
59).
This
Court's ability to stay the enforcement of a valid judgment is
governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62. Pursuant to Rule
62(b),
the court may stay the execution of a judgment—or any
proceedings to enforce it—pending disposition of any
of the following motions:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
under Rule 50, for judgment as a matter of law;
under Rule 52(b), to amend the findings or for
additional findings;
under Rule 59, for a new trial or to alter or
amend a judgment; or
under Rule 60, for relief from a judgment or
order.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(b). That provision also requires the opposing
party to provide appropriate security prior to the entry of the
stay.
Id.
(permitting
stay "[o]n
appropriate
terms
for
the
opposing party's security").
In this case. Defendants request a stay pursuant to Rule
62(b). (Doc.
72.) However, there
are
no motions
pending that
render Rule 62(b) applicable, such as a motion for judgment as a
matter of law, to amend the findings, for a
new
trial or to
amend a judgment, or for relief from a judgment or order. Fed.
R, Civ. P. 62(b). Moreover, Rule 62(b) still requires Defendants
to provide appropriate security prior to the entry of any stay.
As
a
result.
Defendants
are
not
entitled
to
the
relief
they
seek.
As this case presently stands. Defendants can only obtain a
stay
under
Defendants
Rule
to
62(d).
provide
a
However,
this
supersedeas
provision
requires
bond.
Id.
("If
62(d)
an
appeal Is taken, the appellant may obtain a stay by supersedeas
bond . . . .").
this
case.
Defendants have
Therefore,
Rule
not provided
62(d)
also
any such bond In
provides
Defendants
no
relief at this time.
For these reasons.
Defendants' Rule 62(b) Motion for Stay
of Enforcement of Judgment Pending Appeal (Doc. 72) Is DENIED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
under
Rule
bond.
Plaintiff's
GRANTED
requested
62(d)
and
the
writ.
Defendants may renew their request for stay
should they provide
Motion
Clerk
for
of
Plaintiff's
Writ
an
acceptable
of
Execution
Court
Is
DIRECTED
Motion
for
supersedes
(Doc.
to
Supersedeas
Issue
Bond
75) Is DISMISSED AS MOOT.
5/£r
day of August 2017.
so ORDERED this S/
WILLIAM T. MOORE, JR.
UNITED STATES
SOUTHERN
DISTRICT
69)
COURT
DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
Is
the
(Doc.
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?