United States v. Beresford
This text of United States v. Beresford (United States v. Beresford) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE 9 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CASE NO. C21-5345-JCC 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 STEVEN M. BERESFORD, et al., 13 Defendants. 14
15 This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ motion to stay an order pending 16 appeal (Dkt. No. 106). Having thoroughly considered the motions and the relevant record, the 17 Court hereby DENIES the motion for the reasons explained herein. 18 The facts of this suit have been detailed previously and the Court will not repeat them 19 here. (See Dkt. No. 93 at 2–7.) The Court adopted a Report and Recommendation granting 20 summary judgment to Plaintiff on all claims. (See Dkt. No. 98 at 1.) Subsequently, the Court 21 granted Plaintiff’s motion for decree of foreclosure. (Dkt. No. 105 at 1.) Defendants filed a 22 notice of appeal and a motion to stay the foreclosure order pending the resolution of that appeal. 23 (Dkt. Nos. 107, 106.) 24 Defendants move to stay this case pending their appeal of the Court’s foreclosure decree. 25 (Dkt. No. 106 at 1.) Their motion simply states, “[i]n accordance with FRAP 8(a)(1)(A), 26 Defendants hereby move for a stay of the Order granting a Decree of Foreclosure pending the 1 appeal.” (Id.) Defendants do not otherwise provide any substantive basis for the Court to stay 2 this case pending the outcome of their appeal. See Battle v. Anderson, 564 F.2d 388, 397 (10th 3 Cir. 1977) (reciting elements courts examine to determine whether stay order pending an appeal 4 is warranted). Furthermore, on September 4, 2024, the Ninth Circuit dismissed Defendants’ 5 appeal of the order for lack of jurisdiction, mooting the instant motion. (See Dkt. No. 111 at 2) 6 (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1291). Therefore, Defendants’ motion to stay (Dkt. No. 106) is DENIED. 7 8 DATED this 18th day of September 2024. A 9 10 11 John C. Coughenour 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Beresford, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-beresford-wawd-2024.