Supersedeas Bond

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

• Cheney v. Park Trammell
  65 Fla. 451· Fla.· 1913-05-20 ·cited 4×
  This case involves an appeal from a judgment against sureties on a supersedeas bond in a criminal case. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the trial court's judgment against the defendants on an appearance bond related to a criminal defendant who failed to appear after his convicti
• Peacock v. Feaster
  52 Fla. 563· Fla.· 1906-06-01 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court granted an injunction to restrain the execution of a judgment pending appeal. The appellants were required to post a bond to ensure payment of the judgment if the appeal failed.
• H. J. Long et ux. v. Herrick
  28 Fla. 755· Fla.· 1891-06-01 ·cited 4×
  The court dismissed an appeal due to the appellants' failure to file a transcript of the record within the required time, despite agreements to use prior records. The court found the appeal frivolous and intended for delay, awarding damages to the appellee.
• Zoldan v. the Entrada Condo., Inc.
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-03-26 ·cited 3×
  Appellant appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to disburse escrowed funds held in the court registry. The trial court had entered a final judgment determining Appellant was entitled to a portion of the escrowed funds, but refused to disburse them pending a separate app
• Ruiz v. State
  284 So. 3d 1134· Fla. 3d DCA· 2019-03-20 ·cited 3×
  A trial court abuses its discretion by restricting voir dire questioning about a defendant's sole theory of defense, as prospective jurors' attitudes about that defense theory are essential to determining challenges for cause.
• Superior Garlic Int'l, Inc. v. E & A Produce Corp.
  934 So. 2d 484· Fla. 3d DCA· 2004-10-20 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court affirmed the finding against Superior on its counterclaims but reversed the verdicts against Superior and Trujillo on E & A's claim, finding the trial court should have set them aside.
• 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.
• Walters v. Aquatic Sensors Corp.
  633 So. 2d 475· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-02-16 ·cited 3×
  Appellants challenged a trial court's summary denial of their petition to stay enforcement of a foreign judgment without a hearing. The Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the trial court erred by failing to consider equitable defenses available under Fl
• Basf Corp. v. The OLD World Trading Co.
  979 F.2d 615· 7th Cir.· 1992-11-13 ·cited 3×
  A prevailing party's appeal does not automatically stay enforcement of a money judgment; a bond is generally required unless the appeal's theory is inconsistent with enforcement.
• Raymark Indus., Inc. v. LAI
  973 F.2d 1125· 3d Cir.· 1992-09-02 ·cited 3×
  The Third Circuit Court of Appeals held that the district court erred in failing to apply the Borman decision to the case. The court found that the automatic stay provision of section 362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code applies to pre-petition state court actions against a debtor who h
• In re Holywell Corp. v. Bank OF NEW York
  901 F.2d 931· 11th Cir.· 1990-05-18 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the debtors' appeal from the bankruptcy court's determination of the Bank's lien amount was moot because the reorganization plan, which relied on that determination, had been substantially consummated.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Hank Westphal
  859 F.2d 818· 9th Cir.· 1988-10-21 ·cited 3×
  A party appealing an order directing compliance with NLRB subpoenas is not entitled to a stay of the order as a matter of right under Fed. R.Civ.P. 62(d) upon filing a supersedeas bond.
• Kaplan v. Hirsh
  696 F.2d 1046· 4th Cir.· 1982-04-23 ·cited 3×
  A judgment is considered 'final' for registration purposes under 28 U.S.C. § 1963 even if an appeal is pending, unless a supersedeas bond has been filed to stay execution.
• State Rd. Dep't of Fla. v. Bramlett
  171 So. 2d 34· Fla. 1st DCA· 1965-01-12 ·cited 3×
  The State Road Department appealed a condemnation judgment, and landowners moved to dismiss the appeal for failure to pay court costs (attorney's fees) before perfecting the appeal. The Florida appellate court held that the state, as an agency of the state acting in its official
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Ganz
  111 So. 2d 91· Fla. 3d DCA· 1959-01-08 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the supersedeas bond amount set by the trial court was excessive for a money judgment and should be reduced.
• Monira C. Knapp v. Fredrickson
  156 Fla. 600· Fla.· 1945-11-30 ·cited 3×
  This case addresses the enforceability of a supersedeas bond conditioned on appeal prosecution 'without delay and to effect.' The Florida Supreme Court held that 'to effect' means 'with success,' requiring the appealing party not merely to pursue the appeal promptly but to ultima
• Midcoast Inv. Co. v. Smith
  141 Fla. 826· Fla.· 1940-02-20 ·cited 3×
  Midcoast Investment Company sued S. V. Smith and others on a supersedeas bond executed in connection with Smith's appeal of a foreclosure decree. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's judgment for the defendants, holding that proof of rental value alone does not su
• Tip Top Grocery Co. v. Catharine Wellner
  130 Fla. 270· Fla.· 1937-11-19 ·cited 3×
  Tip Top Grocery Company appeals a tort judgment for slander reduced by remittitur. The Florida Supreme Court addresses whether the trial court complied with statutory requirements for motions for new trial and bills of exceptions, vacating an order that had struck these documents
• Tavern Inv. Co. v. Diehl
  129 Fla. 635· Fla.· 1937-10-23 ·cited 3×
  The Supreme Court of Florida dismissed an appeal filed by Tavern Investment Co. because the company failed to properly join all other affected parties in the appeal, thus lacking jurisdiction. This case highlights the procedural requirement of including all necessary parties when
• S. Brewing Co. v. May
  122 Fla. 782· Fla.· 1936-02-14 ·cited 3×
  Southern Brewing Company appealed an order from the Hillsborough County Circuit Court denying various motions and pleas in a suit against R. L. May. The Florida Supreme Court remanded the case for reconsideration in light of a related decision in a parallel suit between the same
• Tippins v. Belle Mead Dev. Corp.
  136 Fla. 373· Fla.· 1935-12-10 ·cited 3×
  This case involves a dispute over the priority of liens and contempt proceedings arising from a mortgage foreclosure. The court affirmed the lower court's decisions regarding contempt, lien superiority, and the sale of mortgaged property, finding the appellant's actions to be wil
• Adams v. Burns
  119 Fla. 770· Fla.· 1935-05-07 ·cited 3×
  In this detinue action, the Florida Supreme Court addresses two issues: (1) whether the plaintiff's brief violates Rule 20 by failing to phrase questions so the points of law clearly appear, and (2) whether the trial court properly imposed conditions on the supersedeas bond requi
• Est. Realty Corp. v. Taubel
  114 Fla. 409· Fla.· 1934-04-02 ·cited 3×
  Estate Realty Corporation mortgaged a Miami Beach hotel to William Taubel in 1928, and the mortgage was later transferred to his wife Anna Taubel. When the mortgagor defaulted, the Taubels sought foreclosure and obtained appointment of a receiver. The defendants challenged the re
• Vecchio v. Hanson
  113 Fla. 1· Fla.· 1933-11-25 ·cited 3×
  In this foreclosure case, the Florida Supreme Court upheld judgment on a supersedeas bond where the principal obligor failed to produce mortgaged boats as required. The court held that a mortgagor cannot use a subsequently-arising maritime lien (which he allowed to accrue in viol
• Hines v. Noel
  110 Fla. 457· Fla.· 1933-06-10 ·cited 3×
  In this writ of error case, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the Circuit Court's denial of habeas corpus relief to William Hines, who was re-arrested 78 days after posting a supersedeas bond pending appeal of his municipal court conviction. The court held that municipal court c
• Mohler v. Elliott
  332 So. 3d 1120· Fla. 2d DCA· 2022-01-14 ·cited 2×
  The appellate court granted certiorari review of a partial final summary judgment, finding it was improperly entered. The court quashed the judgment because it allowed execution before a final appealable order, causing irreparable harm.
• Caruso v. Caruso
  932 So. 2d 457· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-05-31 ·cited 2×
  The trial court erred in granting a stay of execution on a money judgment without the required bond.
• Ileana Morales v. Gilda Rosenberg
  879 So. 2d 1237· Fla. 3d DCA· 2004-04-14 ·cited 2×
  The court reversed the trial court's award of trial-level attorney's fees and costs, affirming only the award of appellate-level fees and costs.
• Platt v. Russek
  921 So. 2d 5· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-04-14 ·cited 2×
  An appellate court granted review of a trial court's order staying execution of a money judgment for attorney's fees and costs without requiring a supersedeas bond, vacating the stay.
• Begonia Corp. v. NAM Fin. Corp.
  724 So. 2d 714· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-01-27 ·cited 2×
  Begonia Corporation and Philip Schwab appealed a sanctions order for $100,000 imposed for conspiring to frustrate foreclosure sale orders. The appellate court reversed the trial court's refusal to allow a supersedeas bond for the sanctions, holding that sanctions orders requiring
• Chandler v. State
  722 So. 2d 983· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-01-20 ·cited 2×
• Lone Star Indus., Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.
  688 So. 2d 950· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-02-19 ·cited 2×
  An internal transfer of funds between a company's departments does not constitute a taxable cost for a bond premium under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.400.
• Zuckerman v. Hofrichter & Quiat, P.A.
  622 So. 2d 1· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-01-12 ·cited 2×
  Zuckerman appeals the trial court's order setting a supersedeas bond amount required to stay a garnishment order pending appeal. The court holds that the trial court applied the wrong rule and should have exercised discretion under Rule 9.310(a) rather than mandating a bond under
• 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.
• State Bank & Tr. Co. OF Golden Meadow v. "D.J. Griffin" Boat
  926 F.2d 449· 5th Cir.· 1991-03-05 ·cited 2×
  A state bank is entitled to a stay of execution of a money judgment pending appeal without posting a supersedeas bond, pursuant to La. Rev.Stat. Ann. § 6:244B and Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(f).
• Steele v. Greely B. Steele and Dessie Steele
  558 So. 2d 526· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-03-26 ·cited 2×
  A trial court retains jurisdiction to enforce a judgment that has not been superseded, even after an appeal has been filed, and may order money damages as a necessary implication of the original judgment.
• Pride Shipping Corp. v. Tafu Lumber Co.
  898 F.2d 1404· 9th Cir.· 1990-03-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while it has jurisdiction to hear appeals from orders vacating Rule B(l) attachments, even after a general appearance, the issue becomes moot if the attached res is no longer within the district and no stay was obtained.
• United States v. Vahlco Corp.
  895 F.2d 1070· 5th Cir.· 1990-03-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Margarita's foreclosure extinguished the SBA's second lien, and Lorelei, as Margarita's transferee, obtained good title that was not divested by the Marshal's sale, thus reversing the grant of summary judgment to Guadalupe County.
• Dep't OF Agric. & Consumer Servs. v. Mid-Florida Growers, Inc.
  532 So. 2d 1294· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-10-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a trial court may impose conditions on a stay of judgment for a government entity, including partial payment of an undisputed amount, but requiring the entire remainder as a supersedeas bond may be an abuse of discretion.
• Neeley v. Bankers Tr. Co. OF Tex.
  848 F.2d 658· 5th Cir.· 1988-07-08 ·cited 2×
  A surety is not bound on a supersedeas bond when the appellate court reverses all monetary damages and remands for a new trial.
• In re Miami Gen. Hosp., Inc.
  81 B.R. 682· S.D. Fla.· 1988-01-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a bankruptcy court may permit a credit bid even if the lien's validity has not been adjudicated, provided a remedy is fashioned to protect the estate, and that an appeal of a sale order is moot if the sale was not stayed pending appeal.
• Mobley v. Dugger
  823 F.2d 1495· 11th Cir.· 1987-08-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the seven-year delay in incarcerating the defendant did not violate due process because the defendant contributed to the delay by failing to surrender as required by his supersedeas bond.
• Miami Int'l Realty Co. v. Paynter
  807 F.2d 871· 10th Cir.· 1986-12-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a district court did not err in granting a stay of execution without a full supersedeas bond when the judgment debtor demonstrated financial inability to post the full bond and the risk of irreparable harm.
• Lindell Tinsley v. Mitchell
  804 F.2d 1254· D.C. Cir.· 1986-10-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a party cannot be held in contempt for failing to comply with an order if they lack the financial ability to do so, and the district court must adjudicate claims of impossibility.
• In re Farrell Lines, Inc.
  761 F.2d 796· D.C. Cir.· 1985-05-17 ·cited 2×
  The District Court erred in dismissing Safir's appeal for failure to post bond, as Bankruptcy Rule 8005 does not make bond posting a prerequisite to appeal.
• J. Perez & CIA., Inc. v. United States
  747 F.2d 813· 1st Cir.· 1984-11-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court had the power to order forfeiture of a supersedeas bond posted to secure a stay of an agency's suspension order, even when the underlying program terminated before the appeal was resolved.
• Logan v. Scheffler
  441 So. 2d 666· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-10-18 ·cited 2×
  Logan was held in contempt for failing to file estate accounting and return estate records as ordered. He was released from jail by posting a $100,000 bond conditioned on future compliance, but failed to comply within the deadline. On appeal, Logan challenged the bond forfeiture,
• Gulf & E. Dev. Corp. v. City OF Fort Lauderdale
  376 So. 2d 878· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-10-24 ·cited 2×
  Gulf & Eastern Development Corp. appealed a trial court order denying its petition for damages for delay caused by the City of Fort Lauderdale's appeal of an earlier judgment. The appellate court affirmed the denial, finding that damages for delay are only recoverable under bond
• Trombley v. Fla. Real Est. Comm'n
  356 So. 2d 813· Fla. 4th DCA· 1977-09-27 ·cited 2×
  The court denied the petitioner's motion for a stay of the Florida Real Estate Commission's suspension order, holding that the petitioner must first apply to the agency itself for a supersedeas bond before seeking relief from the appellate court.