Supersedeas Bond

551 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Makowski v. Makowski
  578 So. 2d 737· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-02-26
• Schulz v. Remy
  573 So. 2d 1076· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-02-13
  In this motor vehicle accident case, the jury contradicted itself by finding no permanent injury yet awarding pain and suffering and loss of consortium damages. The appellate court affirmed the trial judge's authority to order a remittitur to remove the improperly awarded damages
• Raby v. M/V Pine Forest
  918 F.2d 80· 9th Cir.· 1990-10-29
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by failing to consider that payment of back wages into court would stop the accrual of penalty wages when setting the supersedeas bond.
• Schwab & Twitty Architects, Inc. v. OLD Port Cove Lake Point Tower Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
  546 So. 2d 460· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-07-19
  The court held that securing a supersedeas bond for a cost judgment strips the trial court of its authority to grant or deny a stay or to authorize disbursement of the judgment.
• Johnson v. Pac. Lighting Land Co.
  878 F.2d 297· 9th Cir.· 1989-06-26
  The court held that costs for a letter of credit used as security for a supersedeas bond are not taxable as costs of appeal under Fed.R.App.P. 39(e) when they are in addition to bond premiums and not agreed upon by the parties.
• Avirgan v. Hull
  103 F.R.D. 638· S.D. Fla.· 1989-02-23
  The court held that a supersedeas bond is required for a stay of execution when the judgment debtor's financial condition is precarious and may not satisfy the judgment on appeal.
• H.H. Burghart and E.L. Gosselin v. Frisch's Rests., Inc.
  865 F.2d 1162· 10th Cir.· 1989-01-17
  The court held that the district court correctly denied supplemental relief because the original judgment and supersedeas bond did not provide for recovery beyond possession and the monthly rent stipulated in the bond.
• GHK Exploration Co. v. Tenneco OIL Co.
  857 F.2d 1388· 10th Cir.· 1988-09-23
  A dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction does not make a party the 'prevailing party' entitled to attorney fees under Oklahoma law, as prevailing requires a decision on the merits.
• MacKAY v. Fla. Power & Light Co.
  524 So. 2d 1068· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-04-20
  The court held that Aegis is equitably estopped from asserting that the clerk was free to disburse funds, thus entitling the Mackays to additional post-judgment interest.
• 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.
• N & C Props. v. Vanguard Bank & Tr. Co.
  519 So. 2d 1048· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-01-22
  N & C Properties appeals from a judgment confirming an Alabama court's decision rescinding condominium purchase agreements and awarding escrowed funds to the buyers, and approving the escrow agent's interpleader action distributing those funds in Florida. The appellate court affi
• Burgoyne v. Frank B. Hall & Co. OF Haw., Inc.
  781 F.2d 1418· 9th Cir.· 1986-02-07
  The court held that 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c) does not apply to suits against sureties on supersedeas bonds, and that the common law bond doctrine was inapplicable as the plaintiffs had rejected the bond.
• Collins v. State
  478 So. 2d 402· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-11-05
  Appellant Collins appeals an order denying his motion for post-conviction release pending appeal of his sentence. The court affirmed the denial, holding that Rule 3.691 authorizes release only for those appealing convictions, not sentences alone.
• Meilman v. State
  449 So. 2d 965· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-05-09
  The trial court erred in denying a motion for a supersedeas bond solely because the defendant entered a nolo contendere plea rather than being convicted by a jury.
• AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. & Emil Morton v. Pollock
  449 So. 2d 1289· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-03-27
  The court held that the Bank satisfied its obligations under the second judgment by delivering a quit-claim deed, and therefore the supersedeas bond should not be used to satisfy the prior money judgment.
• Bevelon D. Locke v. Allstate Ins. Co.
  696 F.2d 1340· 11th Cir.· 1983-02-03
  A cash deposit in lieu of a supersedeas bond is equivalent to a bond with surety for the purpose of assessing the 10 percent penalty under Ala.Code § 12-22-72 when a money judgment is affirmed on appeal.
• Brown J. Sharp v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  689 F.2d 87· 6th Cir.· 1982-09-27
  Sums paid as 'supersedeas damages' under Ky. Rev. Stat. § 21.130 do not constitute 'interest' for the purpose of federal income tax deductions under Internal Revenue Code § 163.
• Cerrito v. Kovitch
  406 So. 2d 125· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-12-09
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's order requiring appellants to post a supersedeas bond equal to the outstanding mortgage balance plus 15% to stay a foreclosure sale pending appeal. The court held that Florida Appellate Rule 9.310(b)(1)'s automatic bond
• Cmty. Health OF S. Dade, Inc. v. Modena Hale
  395 So. 2d 1286· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-04-01
  Community Health of South Dade, Inc. sought review of an order denying its motion to strike a supersedeas bond where the surety was Foremost Insurance Company, the same company that provided the defendant's malpractice liability coverage. The Florida District Court of Appeal held
• Richard's Paint MFG. v. Onyx Paints, Inc.
  394 So. 2d 1064· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-03-04
  Richard's Paint Manufacturing Company appealed a judgment requiring it to pay both a $4,000 judgment to a paint dealer and a $2,442 garnishment judgment owed by the dealer to a third party. The court reversed, holding that the manufacturer should receive a credit for the garnishm
• Dockendorf v. Dakota Cnty. State Bank
  673 F.2d 961· 8th Cir.· 1981-02-25
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient for a jury to find the bank knew of a trust deposit and wrongfully set off an unmatured debt, but remanded the Verschoors' damages award for review of potential excessiveness and duplication.
• Lord v. First Bank & Tr. OF Palm Beach Cnty.
  382 So. 2d 837· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-04-16
• Fallon v. Carr & Allstate Ins. Co.
  376 So. 2d 908· Fla. 2d DCA· 1979-11-09
  Allstate Insurance Company sought review of a trial court order requiring it to post a $161,000 supersedeas bond pending appeal of a fraud motion in a negligence case. The appellate court vacated the bond requirement, holding that an insurer that has paid its policy limit cannot
• Edward L. Nezelek, Inc. v. Elevator Sales & Serv., Inc.
  374 So. 2d 53· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-07-17
  Edward L. Nezelek, Inc. appeals a bench trial judgment entered against it by Elevator Sales and Service, Inc. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's findings on the merits but reversed the portion of the judgment requiring the supersedeas bond to include payment of the pl
• Baya v. Revitz
  363 So. 2d 44· Fla. 3d DCA· 1978-10-09
  The court reviewed a costs judgment where the trial court allowed the defendants to recover costs including $2,700 for loss of interest on securities deposited as collateral for a supersedeas bond. The court held that loss of interest on collateral is not an allowable cost under
• State of Fla. ex rel. Irwin Brenner v. The Honorable Ira L. Dubitsky
  347 So. 2d 777· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-06-21
  Brenner sought a writ of prohibition to prevent a trial judge from holding a hearing on alleged probation violations while his criminal conviction was pending appeal and certiorari to the Florida Supreme Court. The appellate court granted the writ, holding that a supersedeas bond
• Robert Caivano & the Stuyvesant Ins. Co. v. State
  346 So. 2d 628· Fla. 2d DCA· 1977-06-01
  Stuyvesant Insurance Company appealed a judgment forfeiting a $10,000 supersedeas bond posted for Robert Caivano's appeal of drug trafficking convictions. The court held that the bonding company had fully satisfied the bond condition by ensuring Caivano appeared for resentencing
• PRO v. The Am. Druggists' Ins. Co.
  345 So. 2d 798· Fla. 4th DCA· 1977-04-15
  The appellate court held that the surety was not liable for the monetary awards in the underlying judgment because the supersedeas bond and the order authorizing it were inadequate and did not contractually obligate the surety to pay such awards.
• Mitchell v. State
  361 So. 2d 714· Fla. 4th DCA· 1977-03-18
  The court held that the trial court's orders denying bail pending appeal were insufficient and lacked proper evidentiary basis, requiring a new hearing.
• Robertia v. Robertia
  336 So. 2d 443· Fla. 4th DCA· 1976-08-13
  The court modified a final judgment of dissolution of marriage and an interlocutory order, affirming the modified judgment and quashing the order.
• Boswell v. Dickinson
  315 So. 2d 515· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-06-30
  Appellants were held in contempt for failing to post a supersedeas bond during an appeal, but the contempt order was quashed because appellants purged the contempt by voluntarily dismissing the notice of lis pendens that had been the subject of the underlying dispute.
• Gazil v. Heidtman
  309 So. 2d 574· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-03-14
  Joseph Gazil petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus challenging a contempt order from the Palm Beach County Circuit Court, claiming he was unlawfully detained for failing to comply with a support payment order. The Florida District Court of Appeal denied the petition, holding tha
• State of Fla. ex rel. State of Fla. Bd. OF Trs. OF the Internal Improvement Tr. Fund v. Dist. Court OF Appeal FOR the Second Dist. of Fla.
  261 So. 2d 818· Fla.· 1972-04-12
  The appellate court cannot require a state entity to post a supersedeas bond as a condition precedent to prosecuting an appeal, even if the bond is required to stay execution of the judgment.
• de Gaglia v. State
  257 So. 2d 107· Fla. 4th DCA· 1972-01-25
  John Mario De Gaglia appealed his conviction for possession of narcotics following a nolo contendere plea, claiming the plea was involuntary because he was led to believe he would receive probation. The appellate court affirmed the judgment without reaching the merits because the
• Ceola Cooks v. Fowler
  459 F.2d 1269· D.C. Cir.· 1971-12-02
  A trial court's protective order pending appeal, requiring a tenant to deposit full rent for substandard housing, is reversible if issued without a hearing and if the amount exceeds what the landlord could legitimately claim for lost possession.
• Robinson v. Loyola Found., Inc.
  245 So. 2d 862· Fla.· 1971-03-24
• Carter v. Lynch
  429 F.2d 154· 4th Cir.· 1970-07-09
  The court held that the civil arrest and release statutes were constitutional and that the evidence supported the denial of the judgment debtor's release from custody.
• Williams v. State
  229 So. 2d 2· Fla. 1st DCA· 1969-12-09
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a supersedeas bond pending appeal, given the appellant committed another offense while on bond for a prior conviction.
• Elkins v. Elkins
  228 So. 2d 105· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-11-18
  The court held that the alimony award was inadequate and the wife was improperly restrained from discovering the husband's true net worth, requiring further proceedings to determine assets and reset alimony.
• Louie L. Wainwright v. Parker
  226 So. 2d 876· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-10-03
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's order requiring the State of Florida to post a $10,000 supersedeas bond in a habeas corpus appeal. The court held that circuit courts lack authority under Florida Appellate Rule 5.12 to require supersedeas bonds from t
• Parker v. Rinker Materials Corp.
  222 So. 2d 203· Fla.· 1969-04-23
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a District Court of Appeal decision that dismissed Parker's appeal for failure to pay costs before appealing. The Court held that when an appellant assigns costs as error, he need not pay them before appealing if he posts a supersedeas bond or p
• Atlas Props., Inc. v. Didich
  205 So. 2d 28· Fla. 3d DCA· 1967-12-12
  Atlas Properties appeals a trial court's supersedeas order that set a bond at $25,000 for a $55,000 unpaid judgment balance. The Florida appellate court held that a supersedeas bond for an unsecured money judgment must equal the full unpaid judgment amount plus interest, costs, a
• Alsina Zapf McCREARY v. Freedman
  196 So. 2d 755· Fla. 1st DCA· 1967-03-07
  Where an appellant posts a supersedeas bond and the reversal of the appealed order satisfies the bond condition, the appellee is not entitled to recover damages representing interest on the fund withheld during the appeal. The judgment for such damages must be reversed.
• Robert A. Johnston Co. v. Southland Dairy Distrib. Co.
  368 F.2d 993· 4th Cir.· 1966-10-27
  The court denied the motion to dismiss corporate appellants from the appeal and modify the supersedeas bond at this time.
• Jenkins v. McCLENDON
  183 So. 2d 706· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-03-08
  This appeal from an ejectment judgment concerns whether appellants properly preserved their right to challenge a $400 special master's fee assessed against them as costs. The appellate court denied appellee's motion to dismiss but left open the possibility of renewal if proper pr
• Nolan v. Ira L. Eshleman
  183 So. 2d 205· Fla.· 1966-02-16
  The Florida Supreme Court held that an appellant challenging a cost judgment has 110 days, not 10 days, to post a supersedeas bond. The court rejected a technical construction of appellate rules that would have prevented appellate review based on procedural noncompliance rather t
• Hickman v. Hickman
  177 So. 2d 844· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-08-20
  In this divorce-related partition appeal, the wife challenged a supersedeas bond judgment that allowed the ex-husband to recover damages for lost rental value after a partition decree was affirmed. The court reversed in part, holding that damages should be limited to the rental v
• Nolan v. Ira L. Eshleman
  176 So. 2d 559· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-05-28
  This case involves an appeal where the appellant failed to post a supersedeas bond for costs taxed against him, leading to the dismissal of his appeal. The court adopted the reasoning of a prior case, Abrahams v. Mimosa Company, to reach its decision.
• Norris Mfg. Co. v. R. E. Darling Co., Inc.
  338 F.2d 326· 4th Cir.· 1964-11-09
  The District Court's order to release funds to secure a state court injunction bond was a proper exercise of discretion, but requires remand for clarification of the bond's terms.
• Smith v. Martin
  336 F.2d 142· 10th Cir.· 1964-08-20
  The court held that the intent of the parties regarding whether a payment into court constituted a settlement offer and acceptance must be determined by the trial court.