Supersedeas Bond

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

• Captain Manuel Salazar & the Crew of the Vessel "Atlantic SUN" & Salem Port Auth. v. The "Atlantic SUN
  881 F.2d 73· 3d Cir.· 1989-08-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the shipowner failed to demonstrate a due process violation regarding a post-arrest hearing and waived any right to release the vessel on bond by their actions and delays.
• 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.
• Navarro v. Bouffard
  522 So. 2d 515· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-03-23 ·cited 8×
  Sheriff Navarro appealed orders imposing a 12% sanction penalty and denying application of a statutory liability cap for a judgment entered against his predecessor. The court affirmed the sanction orders as proper enforcement of a mandamus writ and granted prohibition preventing
• Lerman v. Flynt Distrib. Co., Inc.
  789 F.2d 164· 2d Cir.· 1986-04-29 ·cited 8×
  Interest charges incurred in borrowing funds to collateralize a supersedeas bond are not taxable as appellate costs under Fed.R.App.P. 39(e).
• Geisinger v. Geisinger
  436 So. 2d 439· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-08-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the husband's bond was ineffective to supersede the lump sum alimony installment payments, thus the trial court could properly hold him in contempt for nonpayment.
• Linton S. Waterhouse v. McDEVITT & St. Co.
  387 So. 2d 470· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-08-20 ·cited 8×
  Three consolidated appeals concerning the distribution of funds held in court registry where multiple parties claimed priority based on different legal theories. The court affirmed the determination of priorities in the Brevard County garnishment proceeding and the Orange County
• In re Florida Workers' Compensation Rules of Procedure
  374 So. 2d 981· Fla.· 1979-09-20 ·cited 8×
  The Florida Supreme Court temporarily adopted new Workers' Compensation Rules of Procedure effective October 1, 1979, to implement the legislature's substantial revision of workers' compensation statutes. The Court requested feedback on these transitional rules by April 1, 1980,
• Cap. Bancshares, Inc. v. N. Am. Guar. Ins. Co. & David M. Pack
  433 F.2d 279· 5th Cir.· 1970-10-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that orders dissolving attachments used solely to obtain in personam jurisdiction over non-resident defendants are not final decisions and thus not immediately appealable. A refusal to remand is also not a final order.
• Pitt Tyson Maner, Jr. v. Ingela Idfors Maner
  412 F.2d 449· 5th Cir.· 1969-05-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Florida money judgments for separate maintenance arrearages, reduced to a sum certain, are final and enforceable under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, even if an appeal is pending without a supersedeas bond, and that notice provided was sufficient under Flor
• Moist v. Bernard Belk for Brookdale Cemetery Ass'n
  380 F.2d 721· 6th Cir.· 1967-06-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appeal is frivolous because it rehashes issues previously litigated and settled in state courts, and therefore the motion to dismiss the appeal should be sustained.
• Reserve Ins. Co. v. Adelaide G. McPEAK
  181 So. 2d 662· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-01-06 ·cited 8×
  An insurance company appealed a judgment against its insured, but the insured paid the judgment to avoid property seizure after the insurer failed to post a supersedeas bond. The insured then sued the insurer for reimbursement.
• Wise v. City OF Chicago
  308 F.2d 364· 7th Cir.· 1962-09-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a municipal corporation and its prosecuting officials are not subject to suit under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983, and that plaintiff's distinguishing arguments were conclusory rather than factual.
• Sunkist Growers, Inc. v. Winckler & Smith Citrus Prods.
  316 F.2d 275· 9th Cir.· 1962-08-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the net expense incurred by the appellant in securing a supersedeas bond, including interest and discount, was a taxable cost, despite a prior order regarding costs.
• City of Miami v. Huttoe
  40 So. 2d 899· Fla.· 1949-06-07 ·cited 8×
  The City of Miami appealed a judgment enforcing a supersedeas bond, which included attorney's fees. The court held that while the bond covered reasonable attorney's fees in addition to compensation, the amount awarded was limited by the bond's penalty and the reasonableness of th
• Dixon v. Stone
  38 So.2d 459· Fla.· 1949-02-01 ·cited 8×
  This case concerns whether a bond is required to appeal an unlawful detainer judgment. The court held that a bond is not a prerequisite for taking an appeal in such cases, only for superseding the judgment.
• Cain v. United States
  148 F.2d 182· 9th Cir.· 1945-03-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that requiring a supersedeas clause in a bail bond for appearance pending appeal makes the bail excessive.
• Barrett v. Denver Tramway Corp.
  146 F.2d 701· 3d Cir.· 1944-12-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the recapitalization plan was not unfair under Delaware law because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate constructive fraud or bad faith, and the trial court's findings of fact were supported by substantial evidence.
• Masters v. State
  100 Fla. 1660· Fla.· 1931-01-10 ·cited 8×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a mandamus judgment requiring the Board of Public Instruction of Charlotte County to pay W. E. Bell $450.00 in unpaid salary as Superintendent of Public Instruction. The Court held that Bell, as the de jure incumbent holding over pending resolut
• McCann v. Julien J. Proskauer
  93 Fla. 383· Fla.· 1927-03-05 ·cited 8×
  In this habeas corpus custody dispute, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's award of custody of two minor children to their father, Julien J. Proskauer, against Mary G. McCann who had been holding them. The court held that a father has a prima facie right to custo
• Banning v. Brown
  73 Fla. 54· Fla.· 1917-01-19 ·cited 8×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a Special Master in Chancery violated a supersedeas bond and committed contempt by proceeding with a foreclosure sale despite a valid appeal bond filed within statutory timeframes. The court clarified that only the appellate court has jurisdict
• Henry v. Whitehurst
  66 Fla. 567· Fla.· 1914-01-06 ·cited 8×
  This case concerns whether a supersedeas bond filed by a defendant in a replevin action effectively halts further proceedings, even when an execution has been levied against a surety who is not a party to the writ of error. The court held that the supersedeas bond does suspend fu
• Hathcock v. Societe Anonyme
  54 Fla. 522· Fla.· 1907-06-01 ·cited 8×
  This case concerns a motion to increase the amount of a supersedeas bond filed by an appellee who claimed the original bond was insufficient to cover potential damages from an injunction. The court denied the motion, finding the appellee failed to demonstrate the bond's insuffici
• Wheeler & Wilson Mfg. Co. v. Johns
  37 Fla. 262· Fla.· 1896-01-01 ·cited 8×
  The court addressed a motion to dismiss a writ of error due to an insufficient supersedeas bond. While the writ of error itself was valid, the bond's conditions were inadequate to protect the defendant's right to elect how to enforce the judgment upon affirmance. The plaintiff wa
• Charter Schs. USA, Inc. v. John DOE NO. 93
  152 So. 3d 657· Fla. 3d DCA· 2014-11-12 ·cited 7×
  Charter Schools USA appealed an order denying their motion to dissolve writs of garnishment and enforce a supersedeas bond posted after a $5.25 million judgment was entered against them for sexual abuse. The court affirmed, holding that execution on a judgment may proceed once th
• Mann-Stack v. Homeside Lending, Inc.
  982 So. 2d 72· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-04-25 ·cited 7×
  Sandra Mann-Stack appealed a postjudgment order directing disbursement of foreclosure sale proceeds to the mortgage holder Homeside Lending. The Second District affirmed, holding that the trial court retained authority to enforce the judgment and order disbursement despite the pe
• McPHERSON v. McPHERSON
  775 So. 2d 973· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-10-18 ·cited 7×
  In a divorce case where the trial court denied alimony in the final judgment but granted a stay of a cash equitable distribution award pending appeal, the court held that the trial court has authority under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.600(c)(1) to award alimony pending
• Tenn. Valley Auth. v. Atlas Mach. & Iron Works, Inc.
  803 F.2d 794· 4th Cir.· 1986-10-21 ·cited 7×
  A supersedeas bond remains enforceable even if the opposing party cross-appeals or if the appellate court vacates the original damages award and remands for a new trial, provided the bond's terms cover subsequent judgments.
• United States v. Rose
  791 F.2d 1477· 11th Cir.· 1986-06-23 ·cited 7×
  A condition on a pre-trial appearance bond requiring payment of a fine upon affirmance of sentence is invalid under the Eighth Amendment and the Bail Reform Act, and an assignment of the bond money to counsel is valid.
• Charest D. Thibaut, Jr. v. Ourso
  705 F.2d 118· 5th Cir.· 1983-05-19 ·cited 7×
  The appeal is dismissed as moot because the appellant failed to obtain a stay of the district court's judgment, leading to irreversible actions that prevent the appellate court from granting effective relief.
• Price v. Rome
  237 So. 2d 835· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-06-16 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the appellant and his sureties are liable for the depreciation in the market value of stock subject to a supersedeas bond when the underlying judgment is affirmed.
• S. Dade Farms, Inc. v. The Atl. Nat'l Bank OF Jacksonville
  222 So. 2d 275· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-04-29 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment for mortgage foreclosure, nor in its award of attorney fees.
• McDANIEL Gift Shop, Inc. v. Balfe
  179 So. 2d 588· Fla. 1st DCA· 1965-09-14 ·cited 7×
  McDaniel Gift Shop appealed a judgment favoring three individual plaintiffs for unpaid rent, arguing those plaintiffs were estopped from filing a cross-appeal because they had accepted benefits of the judgment by securing a writ of execution. The court held that merely obtaining
• Grange Mut. Cas. Co. v. Stroud
  173 So. 2d 171· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-03-24 ·cited 7×
  Grange Mutual Casualty Company appealed a garnishment judgment entered against it as the insurer of a judgment debtor. The court held that an insurer becomes liable for garnishment immediately upon entry of a final judgment against the insured, regardless of whether an appeal of
• Fraternal Order OF Eagles v. Floyd H. Proudfoot & the Fla. Indus. Comm'n
  116 So. 2d 245· Fla.· 1959-12-04 ·cited 7×
  The Florida Supreme Court addresses whether filing a supersedeas bond is a jurisdictional prerequisite to obtaining review by the Industrial Commission in a workers' compensation case. The Court holds that while the bond requirement is not jurisdictional, the Industrial Commissio
• City OF Miami Beach v. State of Fla. ex rel. Fontainebleau Hotel Corp.
  109 So. 2d 599· Fla. 3d DCA· 1959-03-11 ·cited 7×
  The City of Miami Beach appealed a circuit court judgment granting a peremptory writ of mandamus against the city. The appellee hotel corporation moved to require a supersedeas bond as a condition of the city's appeal. The appellate court denied the motion, holding that under Flo
• Mitchell v. Mason
  63 Fla. 538· Fla.· 1912-01-01 ·cited 7×
  The Florida Supreme Court denied an application to annul foreclosure sale proceedings allegedly conducted in violation of a supersedeas order. The Court held that no valid supersedeas bond was ever created because the Circuit Judge lacked authority to fix the bond's amount and co
• The State of Fla. ex rel. D. W. Purvis v. Hon. B. H. Palmer
  57 Fla. 541· Fla.· 1909-01-01 ·cited 7×
  The Florida Supreme Court denied a petition for mandamus seeking to compel a circuit judge to fix a supersedeas bond amount in a mortgage foreclosure appeal. The court held that a trial judge has statutory discretion to determine the amount and condition of supersedeas bonds in n
• Yates v. Pinellas Hematology & Oncology, P.A.
  2017 WL 11461033· M.D. Fla.· 2020-02-11 ·cited 6×
  The court granted the motion to stay enforcement of the amended final judgment, conditioned on the posting of an adequate bond.
• United States v. O'Callaghan
  805 F. Supp. 2d 1321· M.D. Fla.· 2011-08-04 ·cited 6×
  The court denied the defendants' motions for a stay pending appeal, finding no basis under Rules 62(d), (c), or (f) for suspending the money judgment or the order of sale without adequate security.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Solow
  682 F. Supp. 2d 1312· S.D. Fla.· 2010-01-22 ·cited 6×
  The court found the defendant in civil contempt for failing to comply with the final judgment, as his claimed inability to pay was self-created through dissipation of assets.
• United Am. Lien & Recovery Corp. & Century Am. Cas. Co. v. Primicerio
  924 So. 2d 848· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-01-25 ·cited 6×
  United American Lien and Recovery Corp. and Century American Casualty Company appealed a judgment awarding damages, attorney's fees, costs, and bond forfeiture in favor of Anthony Primicerio following a dispute over vehicle repair and wrongful lien proceedings. The court affirmed
• Sheldon v. Munford, Inc.
  902 F.2d 7· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-15 ·cited 6×
  A supersedeas bond does not prevent the automatic stay provision of the Bankruptcy Code from applying to an appeal.
• Stevedoring Servs. OF Am. v. Ancora Transp., N.V.
  884 F.2d 1250· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-07 ·cited 6×
  When a plaintiff uses Rule B attachment for quasi in rem jurisdiction and fails to obtain a stay of execution with a supersedeas bond after the district court releases the security, the court loses jurisdiction, rendering any appeal moot.
• G. & T. Terminal Packaging Co., Inc. v. Hawman
  870 F.2d 77· 2d Cir.· 1989-03-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Secretary's amended order, which corrected a material omission regarding the interest calculation date, was the final agency action for purposes of appeal.
• Graham v. Graham
  519 So. 2d 29· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-12-16 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed a judgment for $1,000,000 against the husband, holding that the wife had the option to enforce the cash payment or take the escrowed property, and rejected the husband's contentions regarding interest and fees.
• In re Am. President Lines, Inc.
  779 F.2d 714· D.C. Cir.· 1985-12-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a district court's authority under Federal Appellate Rule 7 to require a bond is limited to the estimated costs of appeal, not attorney fees or damages for frivolous appeals.
• J.C. Trahan v. The First Nat'l Bank OF Ruston
  747 F.2d 990· 5th Cir.· 1984-12-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff could not recover the decline in stock value from the supersedeas bond because a prior appellate decision implicitly rejected such a claim.
• Am. Bankers Life Assurance Co. of Fla. v. Williams
  399 So. 2d 365· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-04-28 ·cited 6×
  A resale of property is a proper mode of restitution when a foreclosure sale is reversed on appeal, even if the property was conveyed to a non-party, and failure to post a supersedeas bond does not bar restitution.
• Constantine Lantz v. State
  293 So. 2d 118· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-04-23 ·cited 6×
  A municipal court judge challenges a circuit court's decision to quash his conviction and sentencing orders in a habeas corpus proceeding brought by a defendant challenging an excessive bail amount. The appellate court reversed, holding that the habeas corpus petition should have
• Carpenters Dist. Council OF Jacksonville & Vicinity v. The Honorable Roger J. Waybright
  282 So. 2d 193· Fla. 1st DCA· 1973-09-13 ·cited 6×
  The court amended its prior order on mandate to grant a writ of prohibition, restraining the lower court from further jurisdiction except to dissolve the injunction and consider damages.