Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alsd-1_13-cv-00258/USCOURTS-alsd-1_13-cv-00258-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 422
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Appeals Rule 28 USC 158
Cause of Action: 28:0158 Notice of Appeal re Bankruptcy Matter (BA

---

IN	THE	UNITED	STATES	DISTRICT	COURT	FOR	THE

SOUTHERN	DISTRICT	OF	ALABAMA

SOUTHERN	DIVISION

In	Re: )

)

RICHARD	D.	HORNE and	 )

PATRICIA	NELSON	HORNE, )

)

Debtors, )

)

MARY	BETH	MANTIPLY, )

) CIVIL	ACTION	NO.	13-00258-CB-B

Plaintiff/Appellant, )

)

v. )

)

RICHARD	D.	HORNE	and )

PATRICIA	NELSON	HORNE, )

)

Defendants/Appellees. )

ORDER

This	matter	is	before	the	Court	on	a	“Motion	to	Stay	Proceedings to	Enforce	

Judgment”	filed	by	Appellant	Mary	Beth	Mantiply.		(Doc.	77.)		The	Appellees	have	

filed	a	reply	brief.		(Doc.	83.)		Upon	careful	review	and	consideration,	the	Court	finds	

that	the	motion	to	stay	enforcement	of	the	judgment	during	the	pendency	of	the	

appeal	is	due	to	be	granted	and	that	no	additional	security	should	be	required	at	this	

time.

A	brief	review	of	the	pertinent	facts	is	necessary.		The	bankruptcy	court	

below	found	that	Mantiply	had	violated	both	the	automatic	stay	and	discharge	

injunction	by	filing	and	pursuing	a	civil	action	against	debtor	Richard	D.	Horne.		The	

court	also	found	that	both	debtors	suffered	emotional	distress	and	mental	anguish	

as	a	result	of	these	violations	and	imposed	compensatory	and	punitive	damages	as	

Case 1:13-cv-00258-CB-B Document 88 Filed 05/22/14 Page 1 of 4
2

well	as	attorney’s	fees	totaling	more	than	$80,000.		Mantiply	appealed	and	sought	a	

stay	of	the	judgment	from	the	bankruptcy	court.		Ultimately,	Mantiply	posted	a	cash	

bond	equal	to	105%	of	the	judgment,	and	the	stay	was	granted.		On	appeal,	this	

court	affirmed	the	Magistrate	Judge’s	order	and	judgment	and	also	granted	

Appellees’	motion	for	attorney’s	fees	on	appeal,	which	totaled	more	than	$34,000.		

Appellees	recorded	the	attorney’s	fee	judgment	as	a	lien	against	real	property	

owned	by	Mantiply.1		Mantiply	has	filed	a	notice	of	appeal,	and	seeks	a	stay	of	this	

Court’s	attorney’s	fee	judgment	as	well	as	the	bankruptcy	court’s	judgment	and	

requests	that	no	additional	security	be	required.		Appellees	object,	arguing	that	the	

stay	of	judgment	should	be	denied	unless	additional	security	is	posted	for	the

amount	of	the	attorney’s	fee	judgment	plus	an	additional	amount	for	projected	

attorney’s	fees	to	be	incurred	on	appeal.

Thus,	the	issue	now	before	this Court	is	whether	the	stay	should	be	granted	

without	requiring	additional	security.	Whether	to	grant	a	stay	pending	intermediate	

appeal	(i.e.,	from	the	district	court	or	bankruptcy	appellate	panel	to	the	circuit

court),	is	governed	by	Rule	8017.		That	rule	sets	out	no	specific	criteria	for	granting	

or	denying	a	stay,	stating	only	that	a	stay	may	be	extended “for	good	cause	shown”	

and	that	“[a]	bond	or	other	security	may	be	required	as	a	condition	to	the	grant	or	

continuation	of	a	stay.”		Fed. Bankr. R.	8017(b).		

Three	types	of	stays	may	be	applied	to	an	intermediate	appeal—one	fully	

secured	by	a	supersedeas	bond,	another	that	is	unsecured	and	discretionary,	and	“a	

																																																							 1 Based	on	a	search	of	the	Baldwin	County	property	records,	this	lien	

(recorded	January	10,	2014)	remained	in	effect	as	of	May	19,	2004.	See	Baldwin	

County	Probate	Deeds	&	Records	Ref.	No.	1436988,	www.co.baldwin.al.us (search	

Public	Records,	Probate	Deeds	&	Records).

Case 1:13-cv-00258-CB-B Document 88 Filed 05/22/14 Page 2 of 4
3

third	that	combines	features	of	the	first	two.”		In	re	Wymer,	5	B.R.	802,	804	(9th Cir.	

BAP	1980).2 A	discretionary	stay,	which	is	part	of	the	court’s	inherent	power	to	

preserve	the	status	quo, is in	the	nature	of	a	preliminary	injunction. Id. at	806.		 A	

party	seeking to	a	stay	of	judgment	that	cannot	be	secured	by	a	supersedeas	bond	

must	meet	the	criteria	applicable	to	a	motion	for	preliminary	injunction.		Cf.	In re	

First	South	Sav.	Ass’n, 820	F.2d	700,	704	(5th Cir.	1987)	(applying	injunctive	test	to	

motion	for	stay	of	bankruptcy	court’s	superpriority	order).3		When	a	monetary	

judgment	is	fully	secured	by	a	supersedeas	bond,	the	injunctive	test	is	unnecessary	

because	the	status	quo	is	maintained.		See In	re	Lambert	Oil,	375	B.R.	197,	200	(W.D.	

Va.	2007);	see	also	In	re	Mirranne,	94	B.R.	413,	415	(E.D.	La	1988).

The	instant	appeal	falls	into	the	middle	ground	because	it	involves	a	

partially-secured	monetary	judgment.		The	supersedeas	bond	filed	in	the	

bankruptcy	court	secures	the	amount	of	the	bankruptcy	court’s	judgment;	however,	

no	supersedeas	bond	has	been	posted	to	secure	the	attorney’s	fee judgment	issued	

by	this	Court.		Moreover,	Mantiply	contends	that	none	is	necessary	because	the	

attorney’s	fee	judgment	is	adequately	secured	by	the	lien	on	her	real	property.		The	

Court	agrees	that	Appellee’s	judgment	lien	on	Appellant’s	real	property	provides	

sufficient	security	for	the attorney’s	fee	judgment.		Therefore,	pursuant	to	

Fed.Bankr.R.	8017,	the Court	finds	“good	cause”	for	a	stay	pending	appeal	is	satisfied	

																																																							 2At	the	time Wymer	was	decided,	a	different	version	of	the	Bankruptcy	Rules	

was	in	effect	and	Rule	8017	had	not	been	adopted.	The	Wymer	court		interpreted	

and	applied	Fed.	R.	Civ.	P.	62	and	Fed.	R.	App.	P.	41,	the	rules	upon	which	Rule	8017	

was	based.		See	Fed.	Bankr.	R.	8017	advisory	committee’s	note.

3 The	party	seeking	the	stay	must	demonstrate	the	following:		(1)	a	likelihood	

of	success	on	the	merits;	(2)	irreparable	injury	to	the	movant	if	the	stay	is	not	

granted;	(3)	no	substantial	harm	to	the	opposing	party	if	a	stay	is	granted;	and	(4)	a	

stay	would	serve	the	public	interest.		Id.	at	709.	

Case 1:13-cv-00258-CB-B Document 88 Filed 05/22/14 Page 3 of 4
4

by	the	supersedeas	bond	posted	in	the	bankruptcy	court	and	the	judgment	lien	filed	

against	Appellant’s	property.	

For	the	reasons	set	forth	above,	the	motion	for	stay	of	execution	of	judgment	

is	GRANTED.		The	supersedeas	bond	previously	filed	by	the	Appellant	shall	remain	

in	the	bankruptcy	court	during	the	pendency	of	the	appeal.		If	during	the	pendency	

of	the appeal	Appellant	seeks to	sell,	convey,	transfer,	mortgage,	assign, or	

otherwise	encumber	the	real	property	to	which	the	judgment	lien	has	attached,	she	

shall	be	required	to	file	an	additional	supersedeas	bond	equal	to	105	%	of	the	

attorney’s	fee	judgment.

DONE and	ORDERED this	the	22nd day	of	May,	2014.

s/Charles	R.	Butler,	Jr.

Senior	United	States	District	Judge

Case 1:13-cv-00258-CB-B Document 88 Filed 05/22/14 Page 4 of 4