Tooley v. Knaggs
Filing
10
OPINION AND ORDER by Judge Frank H. Seay granting 7 Motion to Stay; this action is stayed pending the Tenth Circuit's determination of the appeal in Case No. 11-110-KEW(trl, Chambers)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
JAMES TOOLEY,
)
)
)
)
) Case No. CIV-12-333-FHS
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
DAVID KNAGGS,
Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant, David Knaggs (“Knaggs”), has moved the Court stay
these proceedings pending the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals’
decision in the case of Tooley v. City of Konawa, et al., Case No.
12-7050, involving an appeal by Plaintiff, James Tooley (“Tooley”),
of the April 26, 2012, Opinion and Order issued by United States
Magistrate Judge, Kimberley West, in Case No. 11-110–KEW granting
summary judgment in favor of David S. Young (“Young”) on Tooley’s
constitutional claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The parties
have fully briefed the issues and the matter is ripe for ruling.
The Court finds Knaggs’ Motion to Stay (Dkt. No. 7) should be
granted.
Knaggs was originally named as a defendant in Case No. 11-110KEW but was dismissed by Judge West for lack of service.
Tooley’s
claims against Knaggs, Young, and the City of Konawa (“the City”)
arise out of a stop of Tooley’s vehicle in Konawa on September 4,
2009.
At the time of the stop, both Knaggs and Young were police
officers employed by the City.
Following the issuance of summary
judgment in favor of Young by Judge West in Case No. 11-110-KEW,
Tooley commenced a separate action against Knaggs in the District
1
Court for Seminole County, Oklahoma, on June 13, 2012.1
This new
action was thereafter removed to federal court and is the current
action before the Court.
In his motion, Knaggs contends the interests of judicial
economy warrant a stay of this matter until the Tenth Circuit rules
on the appeal of the summary judgment in favor of Young entered by
Judge West in Case No. 11-110-KEW.
The Court agrees.
The parties
agree that the Court has the discretion to stay this matter.
A
Court has broad discretion to stay a case as incidental to its
power to control its docket.
See Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681,
706 (1997); Landis v. North American Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254
(1936)(“the power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power
inherent in every court to control the disposition of the causes on
its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel,
and for litigants.”).
The two federal court cases at issue here -
this action and Case No. 11-110-KEW - arise out of the same
incident involving the stop of Tooley’s vehicle on September 4,
2009.
It is apparent to the Court that for purposes of judicial
economy and the maximum utilization of the parties’ resources,
these cases would be consolidated in the event the Tenth Circuit
reverses the summary judgment entered in favor of Young.
Given
this possibility2, the Court concludes it is appropriate to stay
1
In addition to granting summary judgment in favor of
Young, Judge West declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction
over the Tooley’s state law claims against Young and the City.
Judge West remanded those state law claims to the District Court
for Seminole County, Oklahoma. According to Tooley, he has
dismissed his claims in state court against Young, leaving only
claims against the City pending Seminole County Case No. S-CJ-119.
2
While it recognizes the possibility of a reversal, the
Court is in no way expressing any opinion on the merits of
Tooley’s appeal.
2
the current action pending the Tenth Circuit’s resolution of
Tooley’s appeal in Case No. 11-110-KEW.
Failure to do so would
result in parallel litigation involving the same subject matter.
The Court finds its discretion is best exercised by awaiting the
Tenth Circuit’s determination in Case No. 11-110-KEW.
Based on the foregoing reasons, Knaggs’ Motion to Stay (Dkt.
No. 7) is granted and this action is ordered stayed pending the
Tenth Circuit’s determination of the appeal in Case No. 11-110-KEW.
It is so ordered this 30th day of August, 2012.
3
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?