Filed: Sep. 29, 2016
Latest Update: Sep. 29, 2016
Summary: Order Denying Motion to Stay Pending Appeal [ECF No. 174] JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . Pro se prisoner Ronnie Edwards sued Clark County Detention Center (CCDC) correctional officers and medical care staff under 42 USC 1983 for injuries he sustained when he slipped and fell on a puddle while awaiting trial at the CCDC. 1 I granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, 2 and Edwards appealed. 3 Defendants submitted bills of costs, 4 and the Clerk of Court taxed $6,172.84
Summary: Order Denying Motion to Stay Pending Appeal [ECF No. 174] JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . Pro se prisoner Ronnie Edwards sued Clark County Detention Center (CCDC) correctional officers and medical care staff under 42 USC 1983 for injuries he sustained when he slipped and fell on a puddle while awaiting trial at the CCDC. 1 I granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, 2 and Edwards appealed. 3 Defendants submitted bills of costs, 4 and the Clerk of Court taxed $6,172.84 i..
More
Order Denying Motion to Stay Pending Appeal [ECF No. 174]
JENNIFER A. DORSEY, District Judge.
Pro se prisoner Ronnie Edwards sued Clark County Detention Center (CCDC) correctional officers and medical care staff under 42 USC §1983 for injuries he sustained when he slipped and fell on a puddle while awaiting trial at the CCDC.1 I granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants,2 and Edwards appealed.3 Defendants submitted bills of costs,4 and the Clerk of Court taxed $6,172.84 in costs against Edwards.5 He did not object to the bill of costs or move to retax those costs, nor did he amend his notice of appeal to challenge their award. But Edwards now moves to stay collection of those costs6 pending the appeal. I construe his thin motion as a request for a stay without having to post a supersedeas bond, and I deny it.
Discussion
Rule 62(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows an appealing party to "obtain a stay by supersedeas bond." "The stay takes effect when the court approves the bond."7 In essence, the stay issues as a matter of right when the supersedeas bond is posted under Rule 62(d).8
Edwards has not mentioned the supersedeas-bond requirement or even Rule 62, but I construe his motion as one seeking a stay without a bond because he has taken no steps to post one. While there is some authority for the proposition that district courts may grant a stay pending appeal without requiring the appellant to post a bond under limited circumstances,9 Edwards has offered no reason why he should be relieved of the supersedeas-bond obligation in this case. He just baldly but "respectfully requests that" I "stay" the cost award "pending the outcome of" his appeal.10 I deny his request because he has not demonstrated any basis to waive the supersedeas-bond requirement to obtain a stay. If Edwards wants a stay pending appeal, he must post a $6,172.84 supersedeas bond.
Conclusion
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Plaintiff's Motion to Stay/Objection [ECF No. 174] is DENIED. Edwards must post a $6,172.84 supersedeas bond to stay enforcement proceedings pending appeal.
