How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Phillips Esq. Your Own Question
Phillips Esq.
Phillips Esq., Attorney-at-Law
Category: Business Law
Satisfied Customers: 19111
Experience:  B.A.; M.B.A.; J.D.
16551887
Type Your Business Law Question Here...
Phillips Esq. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

1. There was judgment in mid-2005 for 130K for which supersedeas

Resolved Question:

1. There was judgment in mid-2005 for 130K for which supersedeas bond was ordered that was not posted. No collection efforts were made during appeal period, after which, by a motion, I was found in contempt in mid 2008 for not posting the bond. I was ordered to pay at least 20 % of 135K within 30 days, after getting the credit for my equipments in opposing party’s possession for five years.
However, this order was sought to be revised to correct the amount to around $ 200K ,including interests and also finding me in willful contempt.The motion was denied.
MY BIG QUESTION HERE is, was the correction, in amount sought because only the latest of the orders prevail, meaning 135K of 2008, v. 135K of 2005? Or could they still insist on counting interests from 2005, for the final payment?
Submitted: 5 years ago.
Category: Business Law
Expert:  Phillips Esq. replied 5 years ago.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to assist you. I encourage you to ask me for clarification, if you are not clear with my Answer.

 

Question: 1. There was judgment in mid-2005 for 130K for which supersedeas bond was ordered that was not posted. No collection efforts were made during appeal period, after which, by a motion, I was found in contempt in mid 2008 for not posting the bond. I was ordered to pay at least 20 % of 135K within 30 days, after getting the credit for my equipments in opposing party's possession for five years.
However, this order was sought to be revised to correct the amount to around $ 200K ,including interests and also finding me in willful contempt.The motion was denied.
MY BIG QUESTION HERE is, was the correction, in amount sought because only the latest of the orders prevail, meaning 135K of 2008, v. 135K of 2005? Or could they still insist on counting interests from 2005, for the final payment

 

Response: They could insist on counting the interest from 2005 for the final payment.

Phillips Esq. and other Business Law Specialists are ready to help you