Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

STURGILL v. BEACH AT MASON LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, 1:14cv0784 (WOB). (2016)

Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio Number: infdco20160105a22 Visitors: 5
Filed: Jan. 04, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 04, 2016
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM O. BERTELSMAN , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on defendant's motion to stay execution of judgment and for waiver of supersedeas bond (Doc. 23) and plaintiff's opposition thereto (Doc. 24). Defendant's motion states in a conclusory fashion that defendant "will be able to quickly make payment to the Plaintiffs if the decision of this Court is affirmed on appeal" (Doc. 23 at 3), yet defendant has proffered no evidence of its financial health or assets. Rule 6
More

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on defendant's motion to stay execution of judgment and for waiver of supersedeas bond (Doc. 23) and plaintiff's opposition thereto (Doc. 24).

Defendant's motion states in a conclusory fashion that defendant "will be able to quickly make payment to the Plaintiffs if the decision of this Court is affirmed on appeal" (Doc. 23 at 3), yet defendant has proffered no evidence of its financial health or assets. Rule 62(d) contemplates that a stay of execution of judgment is premised on the posting of a bond to secure the prevailing party's judgment, and defendant has thus provided no basis on which the Court should depart from that rule.

Therefore, having reviewed this matter, and the Court being sufficiently advised,

IT IS ORDERED that defendant's motion to stay execution of judgment and for waiver of supersedeas bond (Doc. 23) be, and is hereby, DENIED. Defendant shall post an appropriate bond in order to obtain the requested stay.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer