You're viewing Docket Item 186 from the case Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Blackwell et al. View the full docket and case details.

Download this document:




Case 1:11-cv-03423-RWS Document 186 Filed 12/18/13 Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

ATLANTA DIVISION

FEDERAL DEPOSIT
INSURANCE CORPORATION,
AS RECEIVER FOR ALPHA
BANK & TRUST,

Plaintiff,

v.

JAMES A. BLACKWELL, et al.,

Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION NO.
1:11-CV-3423-RWS

ORDER

This case is before the Court for consideration of Plaintiff’s Renewed

Motion to Stay Dispositive Proceedings [175]. After reviewing the record, the

Court enters the following Order.

Plaintiff urges the Court to stay dispositive proceedings until a decision is

issued by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in FDIC, as Receiver for

Integrity Bank v. Skow, et al., Case No. 1:11-CV-111-SCJ (the “Skow” case).

The issue before the court in Skow is whether ordinary negligence is a standard

of conduct to be applied in directors and officers cases. This Court’s earlier

AO 72A
(Rev.8/82)

Case 1:11-cv-03423-RWS Document 186 Filed 12/18/13 Page 2 of 3

decision granting partial summary judgment on the negligence claims in the

present case [41] is consistent with the decision of the district court in Skow.

However, a contrary decision has been reached by another judge on this Court

who has certified the question to the Georgia Supreme Court. FDIC v.

Loudermilk, Case No. 1:12-CV-4156-TWT (“Loudermilk”). Plaintiff asserts

that a resolution of this fundamental question of law can have a significant

impact on this case. The Court agrees.

Therefore, Plaintiff’s Renewed Motion to Stay Dispositive Proceedings

[175] is hereby GRANTED. The filing of dispositive motions is STAYED

until 10 days following a ruling by the Court of Appeals in Skow or the Georgia

Supreme Court in Loudermilk, whichever occurs earlier.1

1By Order [158] entered August 16, 2013, the Court directed Plaintiff to
comply with the requirements of Section VI.B of the Administrative Procedures
for filing, signing, and verifying papers by electronic means in civil cases and
reserve ruling on the Motion to allow an opportunity for counsel to comply.
The Court has received no documentation that the requirements for redaction
have been met, therefore, the Motion [132] is hereby DENIED, with a right to
refile upon compliance with the requirements of the Standing Order.

Also, Defendants’ Motion to Reconsider and/or Vacate this Court’s

Order of November 15, 2013 [178] was granted by the Court’s November 25,
2013 Order [180]. Therefore, the Clerk is directed to remove Defendants’
Motion [178] as a pending motion.

AO 72A
(Rev.8/82)

2

Case 1:11-cv-03423-RWS Document 186 Filed 12/18/13 Page 3 of 3

SO ORDERED, this 18th day of December, 2013.

________________________________
RICHARD W. STORY
United States District Judge

AO 72A
(Rev.8/82)

3