Ferguson v. Waid

Filing 124

ORDER granting Defendant's 122 Motion for Order to Show Cause. Plaintiff's Response to Show Cause Order is due no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order. Signed by Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. (PM)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13

SANDRA L. FERGUSON,
Plaintiff,

Case No. C17-1685RSM
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v.
BRIAN J. WAID AND THE WAID
MARITAL COMMUNITY,

14
15

Defendants.

16

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Brian J. Waid’s Motion for Order to

17

Show Cause. Dkt. #122. The Court has determined it can rule on this Motion without

18

responsive briefing, for the reasons stated below.

19
20
21

On April 9, 2018, the Court issued an Order for Plaintiff Ferguson to pay Defendant
$39,399 in attorney’s fees and $79 in costs “as a sanction under Rule 11(c).” Dkt. #70. The

22

Court did not provide a deadline. On August 6, 2018, the Court set a deadline of September 5,

23

2018, for Ms. Ferguson to make payment. Dkt. #115. On the eve of that deadline, Ms.

24
25
26

Ferguson filed a document stating she “acknowledges receipt of the Court’s Order” and that she
“understands that the order sets a deadline, and is not itself a judgment.” Dkt. #120. Opaquely,

27

her only further remark is that she “respectfully intends to file an appeal after trial and entry of

28

judgment in this case, if appropriate.” Id.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - 1

1

On September 10, 2018, Defendant Waid filed the instant Motion, noted for September

2

28, 2018, asking the Court to issue an “Order to Show Cause directing Plaintiff Sandra

3

Ferguson to show cause why she should not be held in contempt for blatantly defying this

4

Court’s August 6, 2018 Order…” Dkt. #122 at 1.

5
6
7

The Court has determined there is no reason to wait several weeks until Ms. Ferguson
responds to this Motion to issue an Order to Show Cause allowing Ms. Ferguson to provide a

8

response again on the same issue. The procedural facts are not in dispute, unless Ms. Ferguson

9

has actually made payment. It appears clear that she has failed to follow the Court’s explicit

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

order, and therefore the Court requires an explanation for why she should not be held in
contempt. In any event, she may present all of her arguments in response to this Order.
Having reviewed the relevant briefing, the declarations and exhibits attached thereto,
and the remainder of the record, the Court hereby finds and ORDERS:
1) Defendant’s Motion for Order to Show Cause, Dkt. #122, is GRANTED.
2) In Response to this Order, Plaintiff must write a short statement telling the Court

17
18
19

why she should not be held in contempt for defying this Court’s prior Orders
identified above. This Response may not exceed six (6) pages.

20

3) This Response is due no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order.

21

4) No Response or Reply is permitted from Defendant unless requested by the Court.

22
23
24
25
26

DATED this 11 day of September, 2018.

A

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

27
28

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - 2