Caylor et al v The City of Seattle, et al

Filing 152

ORDER by Judge Richard A Jones. The court DENIES Plaintiffs' 151 motion for reconsideration of the court's May 23 order staying this matter pending the resolution of Defendants' interlocutory appeals. (CL)

HONORABLE RICHARD A. JONES

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9

NATHANIEL CAYLOR, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

10
11
12

ORDER

v.
CITY OF SEATTLE, et al.,
Defendants.

13
14

CASE NO. C11-1217RAJ

This matter comes before the court on Plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration of the

15

court’s May 23 order staying this matter pending the resolution of Defendants’

16

interlocutory appeals. The court DENIES the motion. Dkt. # 151.

17

Plaintiffs insist that the interlocutory appeals are frivolous both because

18

Defendants intend to dispute the court’s factual findings and because the legal arguments

19

the Defendants raise are frivolous. The court’s prior orders demonstrate that the court

20

has endeavored to ensure that the Defendants will not dispute factual findings on appeal.

21

It will not revisit that issue. Plaintiffs will have ample opportunity on appeal to ensure

22

that Defendants properly raise legal disputes and not factual disputes. As to the legal

23

disputes, although the court plainly disagrees with Defendants’ positions on some

24

questions of law (as it explained in its April 30 order on their summary judgment

25

motions), it does not find that Defendants’ legal positions are frivolous.

26
27
28

ORDER – 1

1

Plaintiffs’ request that the court sanction Defendants for statements they made in

2

their appellate mediation statements, however, is frivolous. The Ninth Circuit’s

3

mediation program is a valuable opportunity to explore global resolution of disputes.

4

Plaintiffs offer nothing to support the notion that a party is bound, in mediation, to raise

5

only those issues that are properly appealable.

6

Finally, the court reaffirms its decision not to enter an appealable judgment, via

7

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), its grant of summary judgment as to Plaintiffs’

8

Monell claim against the City of Seattle.

9

Dated this 26th day of June, 2013.

10

A

11
12

The Honorable Richard A. Jones
United States District Court Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER – 2