Opinion
Case No. 6:05-cv-1391-Orl-31KRS.
February 28, 2006
ORDER
The Plaintiff has filed an unopposed Motion for Judgment under Rule 54(b) as to Defendant, Armand Dauplaise (Doc. 39). The attached proposed final judgment (Doc. 39-3) includes various injunctive relief; however, no civil penalty is imposed. Instead, pursuant to Paragraph IX of the proposed judgment, this is contingent upon the accuracy and completeness of Dauplaise's statement of financial condition. Thus, the Court is asked to retain jurisdiction to impose a civil penalty in the future, in an amount to be determined.
The Court rejects Paragraph IX, and declines to enter such a contingent judgment. If the parties wish to resolve this matter by settlement, they must do so completely and bring finality to the process. The Court will reserve jurisdiction to enforce injunctive relief, but will not enforce a contingent future monetary claim. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED.