Waathdad v. Cyfred, LTD

Opinion

DT243:2

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM DAVID WAATHDAD, et al., Superior Court Case No. CV0735-1$

Plaintiffs,

DECISION AND ORDER

vs. RE MOTION FOR STAY

CYFRED, LTD., Defendant.

The Court here considers Plaintiffs’ Motion for Stay, which seeks to stay Defendant Cyfred, Ltd.’s Motion for Entry of Judgment pending Plaintiffs’ Notice of Appeal.

The Court’s March 8, 2019 Decision and Order granting Cyfred’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment dissolved the preliminary injunction enjoining Cyfred from conducting foreclosures on Plaintiffs’ second lots. See also Order Dissolving Prelim. Inj. (Mar. 28, 2019). Plaintiffs subsequently filed a Motion for a New Trial, or in the Alternative, for Reconsideration, seeking to reinstate the preliminary injunction. The Court denied the motion due to Plaintiffs failure to establish grounds for reconsideration. As a result, Cyfred filed a motion seeking entry of judgment to include an award of damages, attorney’s fees and costs caused by the injunction in this case, which Plaintiffs now ask the Court to stay based on the pendency of their appeal in this case. Mot. Entry J. (June 27, 2019); Pls.’ Reply (Sept. 5, 2019).

ORIGINAL

CV0735-18 DECISION AND ORDER RE MOTION FOR STAY Page 2 Guam Rule of Civil Procedure 62(d) provides that “[wihen an appeal is taken, the appellant by giving a supersedeas bond may obtain a stay... The bond may be given at or afier the time of filing the notice of appeal or of procuring the order allowing the appeal... The stay is effective when the supersedeas bond is approved by the court.” Also, a “party who chooses to appeal but who fails to obtain a stay or injunction pending appeal risks losing its ability to realize the benefits of the successful appeal.” Sananap v. Cyfred Ltd., 2009 Guam 13 ¶ 21.

Plaintiffs have not obtained an approved supersedeas bond from this Court. The Court’s February 5, 2019 Decision and Order Re Adequacy of Security ordered Plaintiffs to submit proof of adequate security within 30 days of its decision in order to continue the preliminary injunction in place. Plaintiffs failed to provide additional, adequate security, and the Court dissolved the preliminary injunction. Order Dissolving Prelim. Inj. Having appealed without providing a bond, the Court finds Plaintiffs have lost the benefit of staying Cyfted’s Motion for Entry of Judgment pending appeal.

Accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs’ Motion for Stay.

The Court now addresses other pending issues. Given that proposed dates for depositions related to Plaintiffs’ July 11, 2019 Request for Expedited Discovery Assistance have now passed, within ten days of this Decision and Order, the parties may submit supplemental briefs of no more than five pages on the issue of Frances Gill’s deposition as well as any objections to the use of the expedited discovery process. Defendants’ Motion for Entry of Judgment remains in abeyance pending the Court’s disposition of the expedited discovery request.

ORIGINAL

CV0735-18 DECISION AND ORDER RE MOTION FOR STAY Page 3 SO ORDERED this 2d day of October 2019.

HOf. ELYZE M. IRIARTE

Judge, Superior Court of Guam

içe thf a ocpy of the

efo VIãS paCflG fl the

1tZLme

y2r’/7

Appearing Attorneys: Wayson W.S. Wong, from Law Offices of Wayson Wong, for Plaintiffs Curtis C. Van de veld, from the Vandeveld Law Offices, for Defendant Cyfred, Ltd.

ORIGINAL