{"id":77,"date":"2015-09-30T20:10:34","date_gmt":"2015-10-01T00:10:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/thelegaldish\/?p=77"},"modified":"2020-08-04T17:32:49","modified_gmt":"2020-08-04T21:32:49","slug":"sinbads-stay-of-execution-runs-out","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/thelegaldish\/2015\/09\/30\/sinbads-stay-of-execution-runs-out\/","title":{"rendered":"Sinbad\u2019s Stay of Execution Runs Out"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Constantine Mittendorf<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

\"SinbadsClose\"As of today, Sinbad\u2019s does not have any immediate plans to close its 40 year old saloon doors, despite losing its eviction case two months ago. The Court stayed eviction and the execution of judgment, but that order expires today \u2013 September 30th<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

For background, the City of San Francisco owns the pier where Sinbad\u2019s restaurant has been operating since the mid-1970\u2019s. The City has plans to build a new ferry terminal there and Sinbad\u2019s has been resisting wherever it can. Back in 2012, Sinbad\u2019s agreed to vacate the property after two years, but then it reneged. The City then filed an eviction lawsuit in April 2015, and it won a jury verdict against Sinbad\u2019s on July 31, 2015. Now two months have passed and Sinbad\u2019s is still open.<\/p>\n

In August, Sinbad\u2019s filed a Motion Notwithstanding the Verdict, a Motion for a New Trial, and a Motion to Stay the Execution of Judgment, which asked the court to throw out the jury verdict and\/or to delay the actual eviction by the Sheriff\u2019s Office. This appears to have been an attempt by Sinbad\u2019s to either throw out the jury verdict (which rarely happens) or help extend its deadline to file an appeal pursuant to California Rule Court 8.104<\/u><\/a> and California Rule of Court 8.108<\/u><\/a>. Typically, parties have 60 days to file appeals on a civil jury verdict. An appeal could also help delay the eviction of Sinbad\u2019s \u2013 especially if Sinbad\u2019s wins on appeal.<\/p>\n

The Court declined to reverse the jury verdict, but did agree to stay the eviction order until today \u2013 61 days after the jury verdict judgment was entered. As of the time of publishing this post, Sinbad\u2019s has not yet filed an appeal. However, the City filed a motion today to recover $132,000 in attorney\u2019s fees. According to the motion, Sinbad\u2019s lease with the City \u201cgrants attorney\u2019s fees to the prevailing party in an unlawful detainer suit,\u201d which in this case is the City.<\/p>\n

Incidentally, I ducked into Sinbad\u2019s, and fittingly, \u201cDon\u2019t Fear the Reaper\u201d was playing on the radio. In fact, the patio umbrellas were out, customers were drinking martinis, and there were no moving trucks in sight. In other words, it looks like Sinbad\u2019s is planning on staying open until all of its legal options are exhausted.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Constantine Mittendorf As of today, Sinbad\u2019s does not have any immediate plans to close its 40 year old saloon doors, despite losing its eviction case two months ago. The Court stayed eviction and the execution of judgment, but that order expires today \u2013 September 30th.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[61,13,38,63,62,37,44,60,40],"ppma_author":[201],"class_list":["post-77","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general","tag-attorneys-fees","tag-constantine-mittendorf","tag-eviction","tag-motion-for-a-new-trial","tag-motion-notwithstanding-the-verdict","tag-restaurant","tag-san-francisco","tag-stay-of-execution","tag-unlawful-detainer"],"authors":[{"term_id":201,"user_id":6,"is_guest":0,"slug":"duanemorris3","display_name":"Duane Morris","avatar_url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/843ff6e7a8fe5fc92109b47a45f34b6cf0ea499e6e788db23456c838b0ae6747?s=96&d=blank&r=g","author_category":"1","last_name":"Sullivan","first_name":"Margaret","job_title":"","user_url":"http:\/\/www.duanemorris.com","description":"Visit the Duane Morris website.<\/a>"}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/thelegaldish\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/thelegaldish\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/thelegaldish\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/thelegaldish\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/thelegaldish\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=77"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/thelegaldish\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/thelegaldish\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=77"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/thelegaldish\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=77"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/thelegaldish\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=77"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/thelegaldish\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ppma_author?post=77"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}