Case Activity (3834)

1. Motion | Filed: October 09, 2026 | Entered: October 09, 2026 Wilcox et al v. Federal Insurance Company

   Insurance | Florida Middle

   Extension of Time to Complete Discovery

   MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery and to Modify Expert Disclosure Deadlines Set Forth in the Case Management and Scheduling Order (Doc. 15) by Federal Insurance Company. (Tajak, Kristen) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Laura Lothman Lambert.

2. Order | Filed: October 08, 2026 | Entered: October 08, 2026 Hemmeain v. Parkwest Holdings LLC et al

   Real Property: Other | Florida Middle

   Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief

   ENDORSED ORDER denying 50 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Deposit Disputed Funds into the Court Registry for Investment Through CRIS, Approve Alternative Bond Security, Preserve Settlement Tender, and Require Itemized Payoff Accountings ("Motion"). Plaintiff seeks to deposit funds pursuant to Rule 67(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("Rule(s)"). Doc. 50 at 1, 3-4. "The 'core purpose' of [Rule 67(a)] is to 'relieve a party who holds a contested fund from responsibility for disbursement of that fund among those claiming some entitlement thereto.'" Zelaya/Cap. Int'l Judgment, LLC v. Zelaya, 769 F.3d 1296, 1302 (11th Cir. 2014) (citation omitted). The decision whether to grant relief under Rule 67(a) is committed to the Court's discretion. See id. at 1300-01; Houston Specialty Ins. Co. v. Vaughn, No. 8:14-cv-1187-EAK-JSS, 2018 WL 10128044, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 15, 2018). Here, Plaintiff, the party seeking relief in this case, has not adequately shown that the funds Plaintiff seeks to deposit are in dispute in this case, as appropriate to invoke Rule 67(a). See, e.g., Shopko Stores Operating Co., LLC v. Balboa Cap. Corp., No. 16-cv-99-JLS, 2016 WL 11746540, at *5-6 (C.D. Cal. June 3, 2016) (denying motion to deposit funds because Rule 67(a) "allows a party to deposit with the court 'the money or thing' that is sought in relief."); see also Parker v. Rodriguez, No. 21-cv-5574-DFM, 2025 WL 1543603, at *1 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 21, 2025). Regardless, and even assuming Rule 67(a) might otherwise apply, the core purpose of Rule 67(a) is not served by the Motion, and the Court declines in its discretion to grant the Motion. See Zelaya, 769 F.3d at 1302; Parker, 2025 WL 1543603, at *1; Vaughn, 2018 WL 10128044, at *1; see also Wimberly v. Stern, No. 22-cv-7581-VSB, 2023 WL 5578292, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 29, 2023). Signed by Magistrate Judge Samuel J. Horovitz on 10/8/2026. (NCT)

3. 3832 additional result(s)