Williams v. United States Fire Insurance Company

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

CIARA WILLIAMS CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS NO. 18-14000

UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE SECTION M (1) COMPANY, COWAN SYSTEMS, LLC AND LORENZO LOCKETT

ORDER Given that there is an ongoing criminal investigation by the United States Attorney’s Office that may involve this case or witnesses or counsel to this proceeding, the Court finds that a stay is warranted. A civil plaintiff who is also a criminal defendant has both a Fifth Amendment right to silence and a due process right to judicial determination of her civil action.1 In determining whether to stay a civil proceeding in the face of parallel criminal proceedings, courts generally consider: (1) the overlap between the civil and criminal case; (2) the status of the criminal case; (3) private interests of the plaintiff; (4) private interests of the defendants; (5) the interests of the court; and (6) the public interest.2 Although no party has requested a stay of this matter, this Court has stayed similar litigation due to the ongoing criminal investigation. See Reff, et al. v. Werner Enterprises, Inc., et al., C/A No. 18-8350 (R. Doc. 106) (Feldman, J.); Henderson-Burkhalter, et al. v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co., et al., C/A No. 18-928 (R. Doc. 135) (Barbier, J.); Dorsey, et al v. Jamair, et al., C/A No. 18-6603 (R. Doc. 162) (Africk, J.); Lee, et al. v. Werner Enterprises, et al., C/A No. 18-

1 Wehling . Columbia Broadcasting Sys., 608 F.2d 1084, 1087-88 (5th Cir. 1979). 2 Dolan v. Parish of St. Tammany, 2013 WL 3270616, at *6 (E.D. La. June 26, 2013) (citation omitted). 7248 (R. Doc. 10) (Africk, J.); Lee, et al. v. Sentry Cas. Co., et al., C/A No. 19-9978 (R. Doc. 13) (Morgan, J.); Thomas, et al. v. Chambers, et al., C/A No. 18-4373 (R. Doc. 220) (Vance, J.); Frazier, et al. v. Runnels, et al., C/A No. 18-2340 (R. Doc. 111) (Lemelle, J.); Smith, et al. v. Michael Tensley, et al., C/A No. 18-9464 (R. Doc. 32) (Vitter, J.) The Court finds that it is in the best interest of the parties, the Court, and the public to

stay this proceeding pending the conclusion of the criminal investigation. This stay will protect the plaintiff from any risks associated with testifying in this proceeding while the criminal investigation is pending. This stay is also in the defendants’ interest, given that proceeding to trial before the criminal investigation concludes could result in certain witnesses invoking their Fifth Amendment privilege. This stay applies to all aspects of this litigation, including any pending motions currently before Magistrate Judge van Meerveld. The matter may be reopened upon the motion of either party demonstrating that the criminal investigation has concluded, or to present new information for consideration by the Court, at which time a new trial date will be set. Finally, the plaintiff is

advised that she should obtain independent legal advice concerning any risks she may face in continuing with this litigation. Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that that this civil matter is STAYED and ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED. New Orleans, Louisiana, this 10th day of September, 2019.

________________________________ BARRY W. ASHE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE