Hebb v. City of Asheville, North Carolina et al
Filing
42
ORDER that the 41 Unopposed Motion to Waive the Requirement of, or Alternatively to Set the Amount of, a Supersedeas Bond is GRANTED and execution of the January 21, 2025 Amended Judgment is STAYED through and including the date the mandate relative to Defendants' pending appeal is issued by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Case No. 24-1383. The requirement that a supersedeas bond or other security be posted is WAIVED. Signed by US Magistrate Judge W. Carleton Metcalf on 1/29/2025. (kby)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
1:22-cv-00222-MR-WCM
ZACHARY HEBB
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
CITY OF ASHEVILLE,
NORTH CAROLINA, and
BEN WOODY
individually and in his official
capacity as Director of Development
Services Department for City of
Asheville, North Carolina
Defendants.
_______________________________
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Unopposed Motion to
Waive the Requirement of, or Alternatively to Set the Amount of, a
Supersedeas Bond. Doc. 41. The Motion has been referred to the undersigned
by the presiding district judge for disposition.
Having reviewed the Motion, the record in this case, and applicable
authorities, the Court finds that the Motion should be allowed.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
1. The Unopposed Motion to Waive the Requirement of, or Alternatively
to Set the Amount of, a Supersedeas Bond (Doc. 41) is GRANTED and
execution of the January 21, 2025 Amended Judgment is STAYED
1
through and including the date the mandate relative to Defendants’
pending appeal is issued by the United States Court of Appeals for
the Fourth Circuit in Case No. 24-1383.
2. The requirement that a supersedeas bond or other security be posted
is WAIVED.
Signed: January 29, 2025
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?