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)

Download PDF
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?