Potter

Potter v. Mosteller

Good Law
2000 WL 33158412·199 F.R.D. 181·2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20663
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaMarch 21, 2000No. CA-98-1158-22California4,776 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Currie, J.

ORDER

This matter is before the court on the pro se Plaintiffs’ “Motion for Rule 60 Relief,” filed May 6, 1999, and the Petition for Attorney Fees, filed April 13, 1999, by Defendants Stanley McGuffin, Sinkler & Boyd, P.A. law firm, and Wachovia Bank, N.A. (hereinafter “the McGuffin Defendants”). Plaintiffs also filed a separate document with their objections to the attorneys’ fee petition on May 6, 1999.

Previously by opinion filed March 24,1999, the court addressed the substantive merits of Plaintiffs’ claims and granted several defense motions for summary judgment. The March 24, 1999, order also granted the McGuffin Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions and directed Defendants to file a petition for attorney fees, and Plaintiff to respond to it. The March 24, 1999, order expressly directed the Clerk to withhold entry of final judgment until the court entered a final decision on Defendants’ request for sanctions.

Notwithstanding the absence of a final resolution on the sanctions question or the lack of entry of any judgment, Plaintiffs, on April 21, 1999, noticed their immediate appeal of this court’s March 24,1999, order. By order of June 21,1999, the Fourth Circuit Court of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.