Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled June 11, 2019

Kelley v. Boosalis

Judge
Susan Nelson
Docket
0:18-cv-00868
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
3
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Kelley v. Boosalis, Judge Nelson granted Kelley’s motion to register over $6.3 million in judgments in listed states during appeal.

Who this affects

The plaintiff may register the two judgments in federal districts within the ten states listed in the order, while the defendant may face collection efforts against assets in those districts. The underlying appeal remained pending.

What happened

In Kelley v. Boosalis, the trustee sought permission to register two judgments totaling more than $6.3 million in other federal districts while Boosalis’s appeal was pending. The judgments covered damages and costs.

The trustee argued that Boosalis lacked enough assets in Minnesota but owned assets in the listed states. Boosalis did not dispute those facts or that he had not posted security or requested a stay of enforcement during the appeal.

Judge Susan Richard Nelson found good cause and granted the motion. She allowed the trustee to register the December 11, 2018, and February 19, 2019, judgments in federal districts within California, North Dakota, Arizona, Nevada, Texas, Michigan, North Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, and Colorado.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Kelley v. Boosalis · No. 0:18-cv-00868
Judge
Susan Nelson
Date
June 11, 2019

Background

The plaintiff, Douglas A. Kelley, acting as trustee for the PCI Liquidating Trust, asked the court to register two judgments under 28 U.S.C. § 1963. The judgments were entered on December 11, 2018, for damages, and February 19, 2019, for costs. Together, they totaled more than $6.3 million. The case was pending on appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

Section 1963 allows a money judgment entered by one federal district court to be registered in another federal district when the judgment is final or when the court that entered it finds good cause. The court explained that good cause may exist when the judgment debtor lacks sufficient assets in the original district but owns assets elsewhere, or when the debtor has not requested a stay of enforcement or posted a bond securing the judgment.

Parties’ Positions

The trustee identified three facts supporting registration: Boosalis did not have enough Minnesota-based assets to secure the judgments; financial records indicated that Boosalis owned assets in California, North Dakota, Arizona, Nevada, Texas, Michigan, North Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, and Colorado; and Boosalis had not posted a bond or other security or requested a stay of enforcement from this court or the Court of Appeals.

Boosalis generally argued that the trustee had not shown good cause. He did not dispute the three underlying facts. The parties’ agreement about those facts was confirmed at a motion hearing.

Ruling

Judge Susan Richard Nelson found that good cause existed. The court granted the plaintiff’s motion to register the judgments under 28 U.S.C. § 1963. It authorized registration of both judgments in the federal judicial district or districts within the ten listed states. The order addressed registration of the judgments and did not decide the pending appeal’s merits.

Disposition

Plaintiff’s motion to register judgment was GRANTED. The December 11, 2018, and February 19, 2019, judgments may be registered in the specified federal districts.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.