Landau v. Lefkus
Landau v. Lefkus
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case No. 22-cv-23324-BLOOM/Otazo-Reyes
ROBIN LANDAU, ERIC LANDAU, CHERI OQUIST, and JEFFREY DETWILER,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JOHN LEFKUS,
Defendant. _______________________/
ORDER DIRECTING COMPLETION OF FACT INFORMATION SHEET
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Robin Landau, Eric Landau, Cheri Oquist, and Jeffrey Detwiler’s (“Plaintiffs”) Motion for Order Directing Completion of Fact Information Sheet in Aid of Execution, ECF No. [27], filed on May 23, 2023. Defendant John Lefkus (“Defendant”) filed a Response, ECF No. [28], to which Plaintiffs filed a Reply. ECF No. [29].1 The Court has carefully considered the Motion, the Response, the Reply, the record in the case, the applicable law, and is otherwise fully advised. For the reasons explained below, the Motion is granted. Plaintiffs hold final judgments against Defendant for $331,728.86 (Jeffrey Detwiler), $472,668.56 (Robin and Eric Landau), and $368,470.56 (Cheri Oquist), plus pre-judgment and post-judgment interest. ECF No. [26]. In their effort to collect on those final judgments, Plaintiffs move under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.560(b) for an Order directing Defendant to complete the Fact Information Sheet, Form 1.977. ECF No. [27].
1 Plaintiffs filed an additional Reply, ECF No. [30], which appears to be duplicative of ECF No. [29]. In response, Defendant asserts that he and Plaintiffs are engaged in settlement discussions that will potentially resolve this case and other cases. ECF No. [28]. Defendant requests that the Court “reserve ruling on the Motion and instead require the parties to submit a Joint Status Report to the Court in thirty (30) days to advise the Court of the status of the Parties’ negotiations.” Id. at
2. In reply, Plaintiffs accurately point out that Defendant does not contest Plaintiffs’ entitlement to the relief sought in their Motion. ECF No. [29] at 1. They also argue that granting the Motion will not impair the parties’ settlement negotiations because Defendant will have 45 days to fill out the Fact Information Sheet. The plain language of Rule 1.560(b) states that “the court, at the request of the judgment creditor, shall order the judgment debtor or debtors to complete form 1.977, including all required attachments, within 45 days of the order or such other reasonable time as determined by the court.” Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.560(b). “[W]hen the word shall can reasonably be read as mandatory, it ought to be so read.” United States v. Williams,
5 F.4th 1295, 1307 (11th Cir. 2021) (quotation marks
omitted). The Court reads “shall” within Rule 1.560(b) as mandatory. Moreover, to the extent that the Court has discretion to deny the post-judgment discovery sought by Plaintiffs, the Court agrees with Plaintiffs that the parties’ settlement discussion is no reason to impede Plaintiffs’ efforts to collect the valid judgments entered against Defendant. Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, no later than 45 days from the date of this Order, Defendant shall complete Form 1.977 and provide it to Plaintiffs’ counsel. Case No. 22-cv-23324-BLOOM/Otazo-Reyes
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on June 20, 2023.
BETH BLOOM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies to: Counsel of Record
Reference
- Status
- Unknown