Mississippi Makes Legislative Changes to Court Supersedeas Bonds

Posted by Jeremy Rosenthal | Nov 22, 2016 | 0 Comments

The Mississippi Legislature made a change to the state's supersedeas bond statute which took effect July 1, 2016. In a civil case with a judgment award at stake, the party that has won the case is able to collect the judgment. If the losing party seeks to appeal the decision, they must post a supersedeas bond in order to temporarily put a hold on paying out the judgment. The revisions are going to lower the amount of the bond to be equivalent to the judgment amount. There is also a cap that limits the amount to 50% of the appellant's net worth, with a maximum of $35M. If it is determined that the appellant is selling off assets or funneling them to other entities, then the court can require that the caps be lifted. Currently, Mississippi uses their Appellate Rule 8 which sets the bond amount at a level equivalent to 125% of the judgment.

Federal Rules on Supersedeas Bonds

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure addresses this issue in their Rule 62, which requires an “appeal bond” to stay action of paying out the awarded judgment. This rule indicates that the amount of the bond is determined according to the state law where the court is located. It further makes a point of stating that the Appellate Court and its judges have no limits to their power and can make modifications to secure the awarded judgment accordingly. In cases involving US officers or agencies, a stay for a pending appeal will be put in place without a bond requirement.

Colorado Laws

Colorado addresses the issue of supersedeas bonds in their Revised Statutes, specifically in Title 13 defined as Courts and Court Procedure. Colorado allows the courts to use discretion in the amounts required for the stay of execution on judgements, but does limit the amount at $25M. If during the appeals process the court determines the bond amount is insufficient, it will serve written notice of the increase. The party has ten days to comply with the order or the appeal will be dismissed. If during the appeals process, the court feels that the appellant is intentionally liquidating or transferring assets, they can take action. They must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the party is seeking to avoid paying the judgment, at which time they can require that the full judgment amount is bonded.

Contact a Colorado Personal Injury Attorney 

If you have been injured in an incident where another party's actions were careless or negligent, you may have recourse. At The Law Firm of Jeremy Rosenthal, our Colorado clients receive superb results in compensation awarded from settlements and verdicts. There may be a limited time of which you have to file your case; therefore, contact the office today for a free consultation.

About the Author

Jeremy Rosenthal

Attorney Jeremy Rosenthal is dedicated to helping his clients seek just compensation for their injuries regardless of the lengths he has to go to or the distances he may have to travel in order to get it.

Comments

There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Serving Clients In:

Law Firm Of Jeremy Rosenthal provides professional legal services to clients throughout the Denver Metro Area, Boulder County and throughout Colorado, including the cities of Denver, Lakewood, Englewood, Aurora, Wheat Ridge, Arvada, Westminster, Thornton, Northglenn.

Menu