King et al v. Garfield County Public Hospital District No 1 et al

Filing 228

ORDER granting 226 Motion to Certify Judgment. Signed by Chief Judge Thomas O. Rice. (BF, Paralegal)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

6
7

DENNIS KING and TRICIA KING,
husband and wife,

NO: 2:12-CV-0622-TOR

8
Plaintiffs,
9

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’
MOTION TO CERTIFY JUDGMENT

v.
10
11
12

TERENCE SEAN MCGEE, M.D., and
KIM MCGEE, husband and wife, and
OHS HEALTH & SAFETY
SERVICES, INC., a California
Corporation,

13
Defendants.
14
15
16

BEFORE THE COURT is Plaintiffs’ Motion to Certify Judgment (ECF No.
226). The Court has reviewed the motion and the entire file, and is fully informed.

17

BACKGROUND

18

On January 19, 2017, the Court entered a Judgment in favor of Plaintiffs

19

Dennis and Tricia King (collectively, “Judgment Creditors”) against Defendants

20

Terence Sean McGee, M.D., Kim McGee, and OHS Health & Safety Services, Inc.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO CERTIFY JUDGMENT ~ 1

1

(collectively, “Judgment Debtors”) in the amount of $537,500, following a jury trial.

2

See ECF No. 195. The Court also ordered post judgment interest at the rate of

3

0.82% per annum and costs. Id. Thereafter, Judgment Debtors filed a Notice of

4

Appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on February 2, 2017, challenging

5

this Court’s (1) Judgment (ECF No. 195) and Jury Verdict (ECF No. 192); (2) Order

6

re: Defendants Terence Sean McGee M.D. and Kim McGee’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 50

7

Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (ECF No. 194); and (3) Order re: Pending

8

Motions (ECF No. 101).

9

Judgment Creditors now move the Court to certify the Judgment in the Central

10

District of California. ECF No. 226 at 4. Judgment Debtors have not opposed

11

Judgment Creditors’ motion.

12

DISCUSSION

13

A district court may certify a judgment pending appeal in another district

14

where good cause is shown. See 28 U.S.C. § 1963. The Ninth Circuit has yet to

15

define “good cause,” but good cause has been shown where there is “an absence of

16

assets in the judgment forum, coupled with the presence of substantial assets in the

17

registration forum.” Columbia Pictures Television, Inc. v. Krypton Broad. of

18

Birmingham, Inc., 259 F.3d 1186, 1197-98 (9th Cir. 2001). “A judgment so

19

registered shall have the same effect as a judgment of the district court of the district

20

where registered and may be enforced in like manner.” 28 U.S.C. § 1963.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO CERTIFY JUDGMENT ~ 2

1

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(d) permits a debtor to stay of enforcement

2

if the judgment debtor posts a court-approved supersedeas bond. In that regard, a

3

judgment pending appeal cannot be enforced in any district (originating or foreign)

4

where a supersedeas bond has been posted. Columbia Pictures Television, 259 F.3d

5

at 1197 n.6.

6

Here, Judgment Creditors argue that good cause exists to certify the Judgment

7

in California because Judgment Debtors have made no effort to satisfy the judgment,

8

nor filed a supersedeas bond with the Court to stay enforcement of the judgment

9

pending appeal. ECF Nos. 226 at 3; 227 at ¶ 3; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(d).

10

Judgment Creditors also argue that Judgment Debtors do not own assets in the

11

Eastern District of Washington. Id. at 3-4; ECF No. 227 at ¶ 5. As a result,

12

Judgment Creditors have been prevented from obtaining any relief to satisfy the

13

judgment. Judgment Creditors argue that Judgment Debtors own “substantial

14

assets” in the Central District of California. ECF No. 226 at 4; ECF No. 227 at ¶ 6.

15

Judgment Debtor, Dr. McGee, is a Certified Medical Review Officer, and he and

16

Judgment Debtor, Mrs. McGee, reside in Los Angeles County, California. ECF No.

17

21 at ¶ 1.4. Judgment Debtor, OHS Health & Safety Services, Inc., is a for-profit

18

California corporation doing business in Orange County, California. ECF No. 41 at

19

¶ 1.8; see also ECF No. 33 at ¶ 1.8.

20

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO CERTIFY JUDGMENT ~ 3

1

Judgment Debtors do not dispute that they lack assets in Washington and own

2

assets in California and because all three Judgment Creditors reside and/or conduct

3

business in California, good cause exists under 28 U.S.C. § 1963 to certify the

4

Judgment for registration in the Central District of California. The Court grants

5

Judgment Creditors’ motion.

6

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

7

1. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Certify Judgment (ECF No. 226) is GRANTED.

8

2. The Clerk of Court shall certify the Judgment so Plaintiffs may register the

9
10
11
12

Judgment (ECF No. 195) in the Central District of California.
The District Court Clerk is directed to enter this Order and provide copies to
counsel.
DATED September 5, 2017.

13
14
15

THOMAS O. RICE
Chief United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO CERTIFY JUDGMENT ~ 4