LUTHER B. MANUEL JR. v. MANUEL et al
Filing
68
OPINION/ORDER granting 62 Motion to post Bond in the amt. of $38,750 w/in (21) days of the date of this Order. Signed by Judge Stanley R. Chesler on 10/21/15. (DD, )
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
:
:
:
:
:
:
Plaintiff, :
:
v.
:
:
CALIBER HOME LOANS, INC.; U.S.
:
BANK TRUST, N.A., as Trustee of LSF8
:
MASTER PARTICIPATION TRUST;
:
WELLS FARGO DELAWARE TRUST
:
COMPANY, N.A., as Trustee for
:
VERICREST OPPORTUNITY LOAN
:
TRUST 2013 NPL2 and VERICREST
:
OPPORTUNITY LOAN TRUST 2014
:
NPL2; and DOES 1-25,
:
:
Defendants. :
LUTHER B. MANUEL JR. and
GERTRUDE MANUEL, on behalf of
themselves and the class members described
herein,
Civil Action No. 14-5233 (SRC)
OPINION & ORDER
CHESLER, District Judge
This matter comes before the Court upon the motion filed by Plaintiffs to require Appellant,
Karolyn E. Denson, the sole objector to the Class Action Settlement approved by this Court, to
post an appeals bond. Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 7 allows the district court to impose a
bond in an “amount necessary to ensure payment of costs on appeal.” Fed. R. App. P. 7. In support
of their motion, Plaintiffs argue that a bond is warranted because the appeal is frivolous, there is a
risk of nonpayment because the Objector resides outside of this jurisdiction, the objection was
filed in bad faith, and the Objector would have no financial difficulty posting the bond. Plaintiffs
1
requested a bond for $38,750, with the vast majority of the sum, $33,750, estimated to cover the
administrative costs of managing the settlement fund pending the appeal, and the remainder for
the preparation of the Appellees’ brief, appendix, and record. Objector does not challenge the
appropriateness of a bond, only the amount sought, contending that the “costs” of appeal allowable
under Rule 7 are limited to the expenses enumerated in the Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure
39 – the costs of preparing and transmitting the record, charges for transcripts, premiums paid for
supersedeas bonds, and filing fees for the notice of appeal.
Objector is incorrect. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the inclusion of
settlement fund administration costs in the bonded amount in In re Nutella Marketing and Sales
Practices Litigation, 589 Fed. Appx. 53, 61 (3d Cir. 2014), which Objector made no effort to
distinguish. The Court, in its discretion finds that in light of the moderate settlement amount, the
Plaintiff Class is entitled to protection of the award from diminution through administrative costs.
Since Appellant did not contest the accuracy of Plaintiffs’ cost estimates, the Court finds that
$38,750 is reasonably necessary to ensure payment of costs on appeal. Accordingly,
IT IS on this 21st day of October, 2015,
ORDERED that the motion filed by the Plaintiff Class to require that a bond be posted
by the Appellant [docket entry 62] is GRANTED; and it is further
ORDERED that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 7, the Objector shall
post a bond in the amount of $38,750 within 21 days of the date of this Order.
s/Stanley R. Chesler
STANLEY R. CHESLER
United States District Judge
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?