The Franklin Law Firm, P.A. v. John D. Stacey

District Court, M.D. Florida·Decided April 6, 2026·No. 8:19-cv-01839·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

THE FRANKLIN LAW FIRM, P.A.,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 8:19-cv-1839-MSS-AAS

JOHN D. STACEY,

Defendant. ___________________________________/

ORDER The Franklin Law Firm, P.A. (Franklin Law) moves for an order directing John D. Stacey to complete and provide the Form 1.977(a) Fact Information Sheet (FIS) and appear for deposition in aid of execution of its judgment. (Doc. 79). After Mr. Stacey failed to respond to Franklin Law’s motion timely, the court directed Mr. Stacey to respond by April 2, 2026, and warned that the failure to respond would result in the motion being treated as unopposed. (Doc. 80). Mr. Stacey failed to respond. This case involves a breach of contract arising from Mr. Stacey’s failure to pay for legal services owed to Franklin Law. On June 7, 2021, the court entered judgment for the Franklin Law and against Mr. Stacey, in the amount of $80,000.00. (Doc. 62). This judgment remains due and unpaid, together with all accrued interest. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 69, execution on a money judgment must accord with the procedure of the state where the court is

located. A judgment creditor may use “any execution method consistent with the practice and procedure of the state in which the district court sits.” Comer v. City of Palm Bay, 147 F. Supp. 2d 1292, 1295 (M.D. Fla. 2001) (citing Peacock v. Thomas, 516 U.S. 349, 359 n. 7 (1996)).

On January 16, 2026, Franklin Law filed a notice of taking deposition in aid of execution of Mr. Stacey, scheduled to occur via Zoom on March 11, 2026. On January 20, 2026, the court entered an order directing Mr. Stacey to complete an FIS by March 6, 2026. (Doc. 75). Mr. Stacey failed to provide an

FIS and failed to attend his scheduled deposition or produce any documentation requested in connection therewith. Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.380(a) and 1.560(a) authorize the court to compel Mr. Stacey to appear for a deposition in aid of execution and produce the requested

documentation. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Franklin Law’s motion to compel fact information sheet and deposition in aid of execution of judgment (Doc. 79) is GRANTED as follows:

(1) Mr. Stacey must complete and produce a FIS to Frankin Law within 14 days of the date of this order. (2) Mr. Stacey must appear for his deposition to be re-noticed by the Franklin Law. (4) Mr. Staecy must produce all documents requested by Franklin Law 3 days prior to the deposition to be re-noticed by Franklin Law. (5) Franklin Law is awarded its reasonable attorney’s fees and costs for preparing for and attending the deposition that Mr. Stacey failed to attend. See Florida Statutes § 57.115. (5) The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this order to John D. Stacey, 475 N. Ocotillo Drive, Apache Junction, AZ 85120. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on April 6, 2026.

AMANDA ARNOLD SANSONE □ United States Magistrate Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The Franklin Law Firm, P.A. v. John D. Stacey, (M.D. Fla. 2026).

The Franklin Law Firm, P.A. v. John D. Stacey (The Franklin Law Firm, P.A. v. John D. Stacey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Peacock v. Thomas
516 U.S. 349 (Supreme Court, 1996)
Comer v. City of Palm Bay
147 F. Supp. 2d 1292 (M.D. Florida, 2001)