Southwest Fair Housing Council v. WG Scottsdale LLC

• Court: District Court, D. Arizona
• Decided: January 13, 2023
• Docket: 4:19-cv-00180
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 WO 2

8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 10

11 Southwest Fair Housing Council, No. CV-19-00180-TUC-RM 12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. 14 WG Scottsdale LLC, 15 Defendant. 16

17 Pending before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Stay Under Rule 62(b). (Doc. 18 174.) Plaintiff filed a Response in opposition. (Doc. 175.) The Motion will be granted with 19 an increased bond requirement. 20 I. Background 21 On May 17, 2022, the Court entered Judgment following a jury verdict for Plaintiff 22 Southwest Fair Housing Council and against Defendant WG Scottsdale, LLC for $1 in 23 nominal damages and $100,000 in punitive damages. (Doc. 123.) Plaintiff filed a Motion 24 for Permanent Injunctive Relief, along with a Proposed Final Judgement Pursuant to Rule 25 54(c), and a Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Costs, and Additional Litigation Expenses on May 26 31, 2022 (see Docs. 125, 127.) On November 4, 2022, the Court issued an Order awarding 27 attorneys’ fees in the amount of $152,469.54 to Richards & Moskowitz PLC and Baskin 28 Richards PLC, attorneys’ fees in the amount of $98,972.50 to Eisenberg & Baum, LLP, 1 costs in the amount of $4,059.77 to Plaintiff, and expenses in the amount of $11,331.47 to 2 Plaintiff. (Doc. 170.) Consequently, the total amount of the judgment against Defendant, 3 including the jury verdict, costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees, is $366,834.28. Defendant 4 has appealed the judgment to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. (Doc. 155.) 5 II. Applicable Law 6 Rule 62(b) provides that “[a]t any time after judgment is entered, a party may obtain 7 a stay by providing a bond or other security. The stay takes effect when the court approves 8 the bond or other security and remains in effect for the time specified in the bond or other 9 security.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(b). The Court has discretion to set the amount of the bond or 10 to waive the bond requirement. “District courts have inherent discretionary authority in 11 setting supersedeas bonds . . . the purpose of a supersedeas bond is to secure the appellees 12 from a loss resulting from the stay of execution and a full supersedeas bond should 13 therefore be required.” Acacia Rsch. Corp. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co., No. SACV 05-501 14 PSG MLGX, 2008 WL 4381649, at *1 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 9, 2008) (citing Rachel v. Banana 15 Republic, Inc., 831 F.2d 1503 (9th Cir. 1987)). “The posting of a bond protects the 16 prevailing plaintiff from the risk of a later uncollectible judgment and compensates him for 17 delay in the entry of the final judgment.” N.L.R.B. v. Westphal, 859 F.2d 818, 819 (9th Cir. 18 1988). “To fully protect the [prevailing party] on issuance of a stay of judgment, the 19 supersedeas bond amount must be set to take into account the additions of interest, costs 20 of appeal, [and] damages for delay.” United States v. Cowan, 535 F. Supp. 2d 1135, 1148 21 (D. Haw. 2008). Pursuant to Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, “the 22 district court may require an appellant to file a bond or provide other security in any form 23 and amount necessary to ensure payment of costs on appeal.” Fed. R. App. P. 7. Courts in 24 this Circuit have set supersedeas bonds at 120% percent of the amount of the final 25 judgment, to account for interest, costs of appeal, and any damages for delay. See United 26 States v. Cowan, 535 F. Supp. 2d 1135, 1148 (D. Haw. 2008); Alday v. Raytheon Co., No. 27 CV 06-32 TUC DCB, 2008 WL 11441996, at *2 (D. Ariz. Sept. 10, 2008). 28 III. Motion to Stay 1 Defendant requests that the Court approve its proposed supersedeas bond in the 2|| amount of $382,647.05, which includes post-judgment interest at the federal rate. (Doc. 174.) In response, Plaintiff requests that the Court increase the amount of the supersedeas bond to 120% of the amount of the judgment against Defendant, which it argues would 5 || cover the full judgment as well as interest and costs on appeal. (Doc. 175.) In its discretion, 6 || the Court will direct Defendant to post a supersedeas bond in the amount of 120% of the 7\|| final judgment against it, which will be sufficient to cover the judgment, post-judgment 8 || interest, costs on appeal, and any damages accruing to Plaintiff from delay. 9 Accordingly, 10 IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Stay Under Rule 62(b) is granted. Defendant shall post a supersedeas bond in the amount of $440,201.14. 12 Dated this 13" day of January, 2023. 13 14 15 16 yp 7 17 “1 fA Bea □ Honorable Rostviary Mafquez 18 United States District Jlidge 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-3-