Erhart v. Bofi Holding Inc.

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 CHARLES MATTHEW ERHART, Case No. 15-cv-02287-BAS-NLS 11 consolidated with Plaintiff, 15-cv-02353-BAS-NLS 12 ORDER ENTERING 13 v. JUDGMENT

14 BOFI FEDERAL BANK,

15 Defendant.

16 BOFI FEDERAL BANK, 17 Plaintiff, 18 v. 19 CHARLES MATTHEW ERHART, 20 Defendant. 21 22 23 The Court circulated a Proposed Judgment awarding Erhart damages and post- 24 judgment interest. (ECF No. 376.) Many of the parties’ suggested changes are 25 minor. The Court will incorporate some of them and direct the Clerk to enter the 26 Judgment. 27 Erhart also requested the Court add pre-judgment interest to the Judgment. 1 |{and the Court would need to determine when prejudgment interest began to run and 2 ||specify any interest rate(s). Erhart did not propose additional language for the 3 Judgment. And Bofl should have the opportunity to respond to Erhart’s request. 4 Therefore, if Erhart seeks prejudgment interest, the Court requests that he file 5 ||a noticed motion to amend the Judgment under Rule 59(e). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e); 6 || see also Osterneck v. Ernst & Whinney, 489 U.S. 169, 175 (1989). Any motion must 7 ||address Erhart’s entitlement to prejudgment interest, include proposed language for 8 ||the judgment, specify what law should apply, identify the date(s) the preyudgment 9 ||interest should accrue from, and suggest any interest rate(s). 10 Accordingly, the Clerk shall enter the accompanying Judgment and close this 11 case. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 A , 14 || DATED: September 30, 2022 ffi A 5 (Hiphan 6 15 United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28