Opinion
Civil Action 21-710-SDD-SDJ
05-03-2023
MATTHEW DERBES v. STATE OF LOUISIANA, ET AL.
RULING
SHELLY D. DICK CHIEF JUDGE
This matter is before the Court on a Motion to Stay Execution Pending Appeal filed by Defendant, the Attorney General of the State of Louisiana/Department of Justice (“DOJ”). Matthew Derbes (“Plaintiff') has not filed an opposition to the DOJ's Motion as required by Local Rule 7(f); thus, the Court finds that Plaintiff has no opposition to the relief requested in the DOJ's Motion.
Rec. Doc. 23.
Further, after reviewing the record, the Court finds that the Motion has merit.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(d) allows a party to stay execution of a judgment pending appeal upon furnishing a supersedeas bond. However, district courts may allow a stay without requiring a party to post a bond under certain circumstances. The Court finds that the circumstances warranting a stay without requiring a supersedeas bond found in Dominick v. Barrere are also present here. ACCORDINGLY, the Motion to Stay Execution Pending Appeal is GRANTED without the DOJ having to post a supersedeas bond.
Poplar Grove Planting & Refining Co. v. Bache Halsey Stuart, Inc., 600 F.2d 1189, 1191 (5th Cir. 1979) (holding that a district court has discretion to allow a stay without posting a bond if (1) the judgment debtor “demonstrates a present financial ability to facilely respond to a money judgment and presents to the court a financially secure plan for maintaining the same degree of solvency during the period of appeal” or (2) “the judgment debtor's present financial condition is such that the posting of a full bond would impose an undue financial burden.”); Dominick v. Barrere, CV 12-497-JJB-RLB, 2015 WL 7756140, at *2 (M.D. La. Dec. 1, 2015).
Dominick v. Barrere, CV 12-497-JJB-RLB, 2015 WL 7756140, at *2 (M.D. La. Dec. 1, 2015) (granting a motion to stay without requiring the posting of security where the judgment against the defendants was relatively small and when considering the affidavit of the State Risk Director for the State of Louisiana's Office of Risk Management ("ORM”), which stated that the defendants were indemnified by the ORM.).
Rec. Doc. 23.