Free Motion for Reconsideration - District Court of Colorado - Colorado


File Size: 31.9 kB
Pages: 4
Date: July 7, 2006
File Format: PDF
State: Colorado
Category: District Court of Colorado
Author: unknown
Word Count: 742 Words, 4,787 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cod/7846/454.pdf

Download Motion for Reconsideration - District Court of Colorado ( 31.9 kB)


Preview Motion for Reconsideration - District Court of Colorado
Case 1:01-cv-00568-LTB-PAC

Document 454

Filed 07/07/2006

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 01-CV-00568-LTB-PAC CROSS COUNTRY LAND SERVICES, INC., a Texas corporation, Plaintiff, v. PB NETWORK SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation, PB TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC., a Delaware corporation, LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, KIEWIT NETWORK SERVICES CO., a Delaware corporation, and KIEWIT CONSTRUCTION CO., a Delaware corporation, Defendants, and PB NETWORK SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation, LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and KIEWIT NETWORK SERVICES CO., a Delaware corporation, Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. JAMES STEVENSON, WILLIAM STEVENSON, ED CROWSTON, and LARRY ORTH, Third-Party Defendants. _____________________________________________________________________________ KIEWIT NETWORK SERVICES CO.'S MOTION TO RECONSIDER OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO REQUIRE POSTING OF SUERSEDEAS BOND _____________________________________________________________________________ Defendant Kiewit Network Services Co. ("KNS"), through counsel, Grimshaw & Harring, P.C., hereby submits its motion to reconsider the Court's Order of June 29, 2006 or, in the alternative, to require Cross Country Land Services, Inc. ("Cross Country") to post a supersedeas bond as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 62(d), and states as follows:

Case 1:01-cv-00568-LTB-PAC

Document 454

Filed 07/07/2006

Page 2 of 4

1.

On June 29, 2006, the Court denied KNS' motion for satisfaction and partial

satisfaction of judgment. The Court stated that based on Cross Country's representation that it intended to appeal the PBNS Judgment1 and its representation that it would agree to stay execution of the judgment in favor of Cross Country pending appeal, "the circumstances present here weigh in favor of maintaining the status quo." 2. The Court's denial of KNS' motion and the language of the Order regarding the

maintenance of the status quo2 has the effect of preventing KNS from collecting its judgment against Cross Country without requiring Cross Country to post a supersedeas bond as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 62(d) ("When an appeal is taken the appellant by giving a supersedeas bond may obtain a stay..."). Unless Cross Country seeks a stay and posts security for the stay as required by the Rule 62(d), KNS should be entitled to seek to satisfy its judgment against any asset of Cross Country. The judgment in favor of Cross Country and against KNS is an asset of Cross Country's and KNS should not be prevented from using this asset to partially satisfy its judgment absent a stay upon KNS' execution.3 3. Therefore, KNS requests that the Court reconsider its June 29, 2006 Order and

grant KNS' motion for satisfaction and partial satisfaction or, in the alternative, that the Court order that Cross Country is required to post a supersedeas bond if KNS is to be stayed from partially satisfying the PBNS Judgment with the Cross Country Judgment.

1

Cross Country did in fact file its notice of appeal on June 30, 2006.

The stated rationale for maintaining the status quo is that if the judgment is reversed on appeal, the satisfaction "would have to be reversed thereby further complicating the final resolution of this longstanding case." This consequence would be true in most appeals but is not an exception to the supersedeas requirement for a stay. KNS continues to hold $344,810.60 which it was ordered to hold in trust for Cross Country by this Court's Order of April 14, 2006, which Order has been superseded by the Amended Final Judgment of June 1, 2006. 2
3

2

Case 1:01-cv-00568-LTB-PAC

Document 454

Filed 07/07/2006

Page 3 of 4

4.

Undersigned counsel has conferred with counsel from Cross Country regarding

this motion and said counsel has stated the he opposes the relief requested herein. Dated this 7th day of July, 2006.

Respectfully submitted, GRIMSHAW & HARRING, P.C. _____________________________ s/ Philip M. Quatrochi 1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 3800 Denver, Colorado 80203 Telephone: (303) 839-3800 Attorneys for Defendants PB Network Services, Inc., Level 3 Communications, LLC, Kiewit Network Services Co. and Kiewit Construction Co.

3

Case 1:01-cv-00568-LTB-PAC

Document 454

Filed 07/07/2006

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on July 7, 2006, I electronically filed the foregoing KIEWIT NETWORK SERVICES CO.'S MOTION TO RECONSIDER OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO REQUIRE POSTING OF SUERSEDEAS BOND using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following: Gregory C. Smith Fairfield and Woods, P.C. Wells Fargo Center, Suite 2400 1700 Lincoln Street Denver, CO 80203-4524 s/ Philip M. Quatrochi

4