Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 62(D)

17 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Country Fairways, Inc. v. Mottaz-Appellee
  539 F.2d 637· 7th Cir.· 1976-08-09 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the debtor's appeal from the bankruptcy court's orders confirming the sale of assets and denying a Chapter XI reversion, as the appeal was moot due to failure to obtain a stay or file a supersedeas bond.
• Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hughes
  515 F.2d 173· 2d Cir.· 1975-03-07 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge argues that the majority erred in disturbing the trial judge's discretion to disallow certain audit expenses as taxable costs.
• In re Nat'l Homeowners Sales Serv. Corp. v. Nat'l Homeowners Sales Serv. Corp.
  554 F.2d 636· 4th Cir.· 1977-05-10 ·cited 16×
  The appeal is dismissed as moot because the sale of the hotel to a good faith purchaser was consummated without an effective stay pending appeal.
• Townsend v. Holman Consulting Corp.
  881 F.2d 788· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-07 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the majority opinion misinterprets Rule 11 and prior precedent, leading to an incorrect reversal of sanctions.
• Dillon v. City OF Chicago
  866 F.2d 902· 7th Cir.· 1988-06-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in refusing to waive the bond requirement for a stay of execution of the judgment and award of fees and costs pending appeal.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Yun
  208 F. Supp. 2d 1279· M.D. Fla.· 2002-06-20 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the defendant's motion for a stay pending appeal is denied unless she secures a full supersedeas bond within ten days, and she is found in civil contempt for failing to comply with the prior judgment.
• Leray W. Hebert, Jr. v. Exxon Corp.
  953 F.2d 936· 5th Cir.· 1992-02-05 ·cited 2×
  A declaratory judgment requiring a party to pay a specific sum of money is considered a money judgment for purposes of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(d), entitling the appealing party to an automatic stay upon posting a supersedeas bond.
• In re Zapata Gulf Marine Corp.
  941 F.2d 293· 5th Cir.· 1991-08-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(d) does not authorize a district court to stay execution of an underlying judgment pending appeal of an order denying a Rule 60(b) motion.
• Rakovich v. Wade
  834 F.2d 673· 7th Cir.· 1987-11-25 ·cited 1×
  A district court retains jurisdiction to grant a stay of its judgment pending appeal, even after a notice of appeal is filed or the court of appeals grants a rehearing en banc.
• Jaffan Int'l, LLC v. Radhe Krishna Props., LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-01
  The district court denied the plaintiff's motion for an injunction pending appeal because the Rooker-Feldman doctrine divested it of jurisdiction to review the plaintiff's challenge to a state court judgment, and denied the defendant's motion for sanctions without prejudice.
• Drummond v. Alsaloussi
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-09-05
  The Court denied Plaintiff's motion to release a supersedeas bond and for sanctions because it lacked jurisdiction due to pending appeals and the prior remand order.
• Garcia v. Stillman
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-08-25
  The court held that defendants failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on appeal regarding the scope of the injunction, and thus denied their motion for a stay pending appeal.
• Garcia v. Stillman
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-05-15
  The court denied the defendants' motion for a stay of the preliminary injunction pending appeal, finding they were unlikely to succeed on the merits.
• Havana Docks Corp. v. Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings, Ltd.
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-03-13
  The court denied the defendants' motion for a stay of execution of final judgments without bond or with a reduced bond pending appeal.
• Marjam Supply Co. of Fla., LLC v. Pliteq, Inc.
  S.D. Fla.· 2021-05-03
  The court recommended granting Marjam's motion to approve its supersedeas bond and stay execution of the final judgment pending appeal.
• Ligurotis v. Whyte
  951 F.2d 818· 7th Cir.· 1992-01-08
  The court held that a letter of credit approved as a supersedeas bond grants the district court continuing jurisdiction to enforce its judgment and ensure proper disbursement of funds.
• Hoban v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.
  841 F.2d 1157· D.C. Cir.· 1988-03-22
  The court held that the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) is entitled to a stay of execution of judgment pending appeal without posting a supersedeas bond.