Randazza et al v. Cox et al

Filing 265

ORDER that all of Cox's recently filed 245 - 253 , 255 - 261 and 263 Motions are Denied without prejudice. This case is STAYED for all purposes pending resolution of Randazza's appeal in Case No. 15-15610. No additional Motions or Requests for relief may be filed while this stay is in effect (see Order for exceptions). Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 4/8/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3
4

MARC J. RANDAZZA, an individual,
et al,

5

Plaintiffs,

6
7

Case No.: 2:12-cv-2040-JAD-PAL
Order Staying Case
Pending Appeal and Denying Pending
Motions Without Prejudice

v.
CRYSTAL COX, an individual, et al.

[##245–53, 255–61, 263]

8

Defendants.

9
Plaintiff Marc Randazza has appealed my order denying his special motion to dismiss

10
11

counterclaimant Crystal Cox’s remaining counterclaim. Docs. 241, 242. After Randazza filed his

12

notice of appeal, Cox filed a flurry of new motions related to her counterclaims, in which she

13

requests a non-jury trial (Doc. 245), the setting of a trial date (Doc. 246), various in limine rulings

14

on the admissibility of evidence (Docs. 247–52; 255; 257–61, 263), and other miscellaneous relief

15

(Docs. 253, 256). I now deny these motions because the pendency of Randazza’s appeal has

16

deprived this court of jurisdiction over issues related to Cox’s counterclaim. And I take this

17

opportunity to stay this case in its entirety pending the resolution of the appeal.
Discussion

18
19

A.

The court denies Cox’s motions without prejudice.

20

“Once a notice of appeal is filed, the district court is divested of jurisdiction over the matters

21

being appealed.”1 All of Cox’s pending motions pertain to her counterclaim, the continued viability

22

of which Randazza has appealed. This court presently lacks jurisdiction to decide issues regarding

23

this counterclaim, and I thus deny all of Cox’s motions without prejudice to their refiling after the

24

court of appeal has completed its review of Randazza’s appeal. See Docs. 241–243.

25
26
1

27
28

Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Southwest Marine Inc., 242 F.3d 1163, 1166
(9th Cir. 2001) (citation omitted).
Page 1 of 3

1

B.

Stay of the case

2

As Randazza’s appeal relates only to Cox’s counterclaims, I retain jurisdiction over

3

Randazza’s claims. See Doc. 242. Nevertheless, I take this opportunity to consider whether a stay

4

of this entire case is now warranted.

5

District courts have the inherent power to manage their dockets “so as to achieve the orderly

6

and expeditious disposition of cases.” Doc. 241 at 5 (citation omitted). This inherent authority

7

includes the authority to stay cases.2 To determine if a stay of this entire case is appropriate during

8

the pendency of Randazza’s interlocutory appeal, I must consider: (1) the possible damage resulting

9

from a stay, (2) the hardship to the parties if the suit goes forward, and (3) the simplification or

10

complication of issues, proof, and questions of law likely to result from the stay.3

11

All of these criteria are satisfied here. The possibility of damage resulting from the stay is

12

minimal if existent at all. This case is already nearly three years old, and discovery has closed. It

13

will be much harder on the parties if the claims are permitted to be pursued through trial in a

14

piecemeal fashion. The parties’ respective claims and the issues, proof, and questions of law are

15

sufficiently interconnected to make it judicially economical to stay Randazza’s claims while he

16

seeks circuit review of my denial of his motion to dismiss Cox’s counterclaim. If Randazza’s appeal

17

is unsuccessful, the claims can proceed to a single trial. A stay of the entire case will also prevent

18

confusion and the need for the parties and the court to determine if issues raised by motion pertain to

19

the Randazzas’ claims (over which this court has jurisdiction) or Cox’s counterclaim (for which

20

jurisdiction has been transferred to the Ninth Circuit).

21

Accordingly, I order this case and all deadlines related to this case are stayed for all

22

purposes pending completion of Randazza’s appeal No. 15-15610. See Doc. 243. NO

23

ADDITIONAL MOTIONS OR REQUESTS FOR RELIEF MAY BE FILED WHILE THIS

24

STAY IS IN EFFECT except that any party may: (1) file any valid notice of appeal; (2) notify the

25
2

26
27
28

Dependable Highway Exp., Inc. v. Navigators Ins. Co., 498 F.3d 1059, 1066 (9th Cir.

3

See Lockyear v. Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1110-09 (9th Cir. 2005).

2007).

Page 2 of 3

1

court of an update to his/her contact information or representation by counsel; or (3) file a motion to

2

lift this stay with good cause. Any document filed in violation of this stay order will be stricken, and

3

the parties are hereby warned that violations of this order—particularly including the filing of

4

motions not explicitly authorized by this order—may lead to the imposition of dispositive (i.e.,

5

claim- or defense-ending) sanctions.

6

Conclusion

7

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that all of Cox’s recently filed motions [Docs.

8
9

245–53, 255–261, and 263] are DENIED without prejudice.
It is FURTHER ORDERED that this case is STAYED for all purposes pending resolution

10

of Randazza’s appeal in Case No. 15-15610. NO ADDITIONAL MOTIONS OR REQUESTS

11

FOR RELIEF MAY BE FILED WHILE THIS STAY IS IN EFFECT except that any party

12

may: (1) file any valid notice of appeal; (2) notify the court of an update to his/her contact

13

information or representation by counsel; or (3) file a motion to lift this stay with good cause. Any

14

document filed in violation of this stay order will be stricken, and the parties are hereby warned

15

that violations of this order—particularly including the filing of motions not explicitly

16

authorized by this order—may lead to the imposition of dispositive (i.e., claim- or defense-

17

ending) sanctions.

18

DATED: April 8, 2015

19

______________________________
_______________________
__ ___ _ _
_
_
Jennifer Dorsey
Jennifer Dorsey
nn
n
United States District Judge
ed States District Judge
d t
ict u

20
21
22
23

Clerk to notify:
Crystal L. Cox
P.O. Box 2027
Port Townsend, WA 98368

24
25
26
27
28

Page 3 of 3