Buffin
Buffin v. City and County of San Francisco
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 RIANA BUFFIN, ET AL., CASE NO. 15-cv-04959-YGR
5 Plaintiffs,
ORDER STAYING JUDGMENT UNDER RULE
6 vs. 62 AND IMPOSING BOND REQUIREMENT
7 CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ET Re: Dkt. No. 400
AL.,
8 Defendants. 9 10 On March 23, 2020, the Court entered an order granting plaintiffs and defendant Sheriff of 11 San Francisco’s stipulated request for entry of attorneys’ fees against the State of California. The 12 State appealed. Now before the Court is the State’s motion to stay the March 23, 2020 order 13 pending appeal without requiring the State to post a supersedeas bond. 14 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(b) allows for a stay of the execution of a final 15 judgment pending appeal when the moving party posts a supersedeas bond. District courts have 16 “inherent discretionary authority in setting supersedeas bonds.” Rachel v. Banana Republic, Inc., 17 831 F.2d 1503, 1505 n.1 (9th Cir. 1987). District courts also have discretion to waive the bond 18 requirement. See Int’l…