Chavis Van & Storage of Myrtle Beach, Inc. et al v. United Van Lines, LLC et al

Filing 151

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's unopposed motion to stay execution of costs pending appeal 150 is granted, and this Court's May 1, 2014 Order awarding costs is stayed during the pendency of appeal without any supersedeas bond being required.. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 5/8/14. (LGK)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION CHAVIS VAN & STORAGE OF MYRTLE BEACH, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, vs. UNITED VAN LINES, LLC, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 4:11CV1299 RWS MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before me on plaintiffs’ unopposed motion to stay execution of costs pending appeal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(d). On February 27, 2014, I granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissed plaintiffs’ complaint. Plaintiffs appealed that ruling. On May 1, 2014, I issued an Order taxing costs against plaintiff Chavis and in favor of defendants in the amount of $22,796.55. Plaintiffs now seek to stay execution of that cost award pending appeal without posting a supersedeas bond. The Court has discretion to grant a stay without a supersedeas bond upon a proper showing. United States v. Mansion House Center Redevelopment Co., 682 F. Supp. 446, 449-50 (E.D. Mo. 1988). Given that there is no underlying money judgment being appealed from and defendants do not oppose the motion, the Court finds that relevant factors weigh in favor of issuing a stay without a bond requirement. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s unopposed motion to stay execution of costs pending appeal [#150] is granted, and this Court’s May 1, 2014 Order awarding costs is stayed during the pendency of appeal without any supersedeas bond being required. RODNEY W. SIPPEL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated this 8th day of May, 2014. -2-

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?