McNamara v. Hallinan et al

Filing 154

ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that 144 Defendants Motion to Stay, is GRANTED. The Court stays this case pending the United States Supreme Courts decision in AMG Capital Management, LLC v. Federal Trade Commission, No. 19-508. Signed by Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 8/11/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JQC)

Case 2:17-cv-02966-GMN-NJK Document 154 Filed 08/11/20 Page 1 of 3

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

THOMAS W. MCNAMARA,
4
5

Plaintiff,
vs.

6

CHARLES M. HALLINAN, et al.,
7
8

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 2:17-cv-02966-GMN-NJK
ORDER

9
10

Pending before the Court is the Motion to Stay, (ECF No. 144), filed by Defendants

11

Charles M. Hallinan (“Hallinan”) and Hallinan Capital Corp. (“HCC”) (collectively,

12

“Defendants”). In support of a stay, Defendants filed a Notice of Supplemental Authority on

13

July 14, 2020, (ECF No. 151), explaining that the United States Supreme Court granted

14

certiorari on the Court’s decision in AMG Capital Management, LLC v. Federal Trade

15

Commission—the base decision from this Court of 2:12-cv-00536-GMN-VCF, which

16

authorized Plaintiff Thomas W. McNamara’s appointment as Monitor to assist the Federal

17

Trade Commission (“FTC”) and gave the Monitor authority to bring this case. The Monitor

18

filed an opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Stay and an opposition to Defendant’s Notice of

19

Supplemental Authority. (Resp., ECF Nos. 149, 153).

20

When determining whether a stay is appropriate pending the resolution of another case,

21

the district court must weigh: (1) the possible damage that may result from a stay, (2) any

22

“hardship or inequity” that a party may suffer if required to go forward, (3) “and the orderly

23

course of justice measured in terms of the simplifying or complicating of issues, proof, and

24

questions of law” that a stay will engender. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC v. SFR Investments

25

Pool I, LLC, No. 2:17-cv-00279-JAD-GWF, 2017 WL 5068520, at *2 (D. Nev. Apr. 11, 2017)

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:17-cv-02966-GMN-NJK Document 154 Filed 08/11/20 Page 2 of 3

1

(citing Lockyer v. Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1110 (9th Cir. 2005)). The party seeking a

2

stay bears the burden of showing entitlement to it. Latta v. Otter, 771 F.3d 496, 498 (9th Cir.

3

2014).

4

After considering the applicable factors and the potential impact of the United States

5

Supreme Court’s decision in AMG Capital Management, LLC v. Federal Trade Commission on

6

this matter, the Court grants Defendants’ Motion to stay this case. The Monitor argues that a

7

stay is inappropriate because discovery has concluded and all that remains is the Court’s

8

resolution of the parties’ ripe, pending Motions for Summary Judgment. But that fact lends

9

support for a stay, not against, because the Monitor does not need to obtain additional evidence

10

to prosecute this matter; all that remains is waiting for the Court’s decision. Additionally, the

11

central issue in the grant of certiorari for AMG Capital Management, LLC v. Federal Trade

12

Commission is the FTC’s power to recover monetary relief—resolution of which could directly

13

affect the Monitor’s scope of authority even if the Supreme Court affirms this Court’s decision

14

in 2:12-cv-00536-GMN-VCF. Waiting for the Supreme Court before continuing with this case

15

thus prevents rulings on the merits that might later be undermined. Last, the Monitor has

16

neither argued nor presented support for a likelihood of prejudice with its ability to recover a

17

judgment if this case were delayed pending the Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision.

18

Accordingly, though the Court has rejected Defendants’ previous attempts to stay this case

19

during appeals, the unique circumstances of certiorari now make a stay appropriate.

20

Accordingly,

21

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Stay, (ECF No. 144), is

22

GRANTED. The Court stays this case pending the United States Supreme Court’s decision in

23

AMG Capital Management, LLC v. Federal Trade Commission, No. 19-508. The Monitor and

24

Defendants shall jointly file a status report every three months beginning on November 2, 2020,

25

addressing the status of AMG Capital Management, LLC v. Federal Trade Commission, No.

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:17-cv-02966-GMN-NJK Document 154 Filed 08/11/20 Page 3 of 3

1

19-508. Upon the United States Supreme Court’s decision, the parties shall jointly petition the

2

Court to lift the stay. With regard to motions currently pending before the Court in this matter,

3

the Court will address them once the stay is lifted. Pending motions need not be refiled. The

4

Monitor can petition the Court for relief from the stay if there is evidentiary support showing

5

conduct by Defendants that may harm the ability to recover a judgment in this matter.

6

11
DATED this _____ day of August, 2020.

7
8
9

___________________________________
Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge
United States District Court

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 3 of 3