WURT DUR FURK Is a Supersedeas Bond?

Over in the comments of this post at Sonoran Conservative, a John Doe commenter mentions something called a supersedeas, or appeal bond.

This was a new term of legal art for me.  But, they say you learn something new every day. I’ll let Wikipedia explain:\

After litigation and a civilcourt ruling, the losing party can appeal against the judgment. At this point, both the plaintiff and defendant could have similar kinds of concerns. An appeal takes time and can be dragged out in some cases for many years. After the case (and any other processes) are finally decided, whichever party wins will perhaps be more “out of pocket” from its costs. Also time will have passed, and the losing party may be bankrupt or have used the time to frustrate any potential future payments in the event of losing.

Therefore, it is often either a requirement of the law, or a possible point in a ruling, that prior to commencing its appeal processes, the losing party must provide a surety bond – money it pays to the court or a third party, to demonstrate its good faith, intention and commitment to meeting the ruling if it loses, and in some cases to show that their appeal is not frivolous or merely a tactic to delay or avoid payment. This is known as a supersedeas (or “appeal”) bond, and shows that they can and will cover the damages or fees awarded – including any additional costs of the appeal.

The bond may not be – and often is not – the exact value of the ruling. In some cases it is significantly larger since it is planned to cover interest or other costs which may arise on appeal.

A supersedeas bond is often paid in full – and may be handled via insurance or underwriting in some cases.

What are some of the advantages of a supersedeas bond?

Obtaining a supersedeas bond may appear to be judicial red tape; however, it serves the best interest of the defendant and plaintiff. The appellant uses a supersedeas bond to stay the execution of the judgment, meaning appellant does not have to pay the full amount of the judgment until the appellate court makes a ruling and then only if the ruling is to affirm the judgment. A surety bond also replaces the need for collateral. The plaintiff, or party to whom the money judgment is awarded, is fully protected by the bond and ensured payment, that is if the appealing party can afford the bond.

Interesting stuff.

Big takeaway?

Appeals are NOT FREE, even for a poor, poor, judgment proof pitiful pro se  pauper.

OOPSIE POOPSIE!

Sure hope that field goal attempt works out…*snerk*

Like(13)Dislike(0)

Denials Require Proof, You Say?

Well, it’s a well known fact that Bill Schmalfeldt once alleged in a federal lawsuit that his cousin Roy Schmalfeldt defamed him by accusing him of rape.  Bill Schmalfeldt also dismissed that lawsuit with prejudice, which leaves him legally unable to deny that he is, in fact, a rapist.

If what Bill Schmalfeldt says today – “DENIALS REQUIRE PROOF!” – what other things has he done that he cannot provide proof that he never did?

  • Did he in fact get kicked to the curb by St. Gail after befouling his marriage bed with Hell’s Kitchen Kate?
  • Did he in fact live the remainder of his marriage with St. Gail in separate beds because her condition for allowing him into the tincasa was the permanent withholding of spousal privileges?
  • Did he in fact scam the National Institutes of Health into a pensioned disability retirement?
  • Did he in fact ever have a job in journalism or radio from which he was not fired?
  • Was he in fact evicted from the enclave of the NINJANUNS?
  • Did he in fact violate his lease in Iowa to escape to his new Inflatababe?
  • Did he in fact fail to inform the states of Wisconsin, Iowa and possibly South Carolina of his disability, thus fraudulently acquiring driver’s licenses in one or more of those states?
  • Did he in fact administer multiple pairs of Irish Sunglasses to his soulmate throughout their marriage?
  • Was she in fact too quick for him to catch?
  • Did he in fact abandon four pets in two states to the streets?
  • Were those pets in fact served as entrees in various Asian restaurants?
  • Did he in fact leave the urn behind in Iowa?
  • Did he in fact murder his first wife and chop her body into stew meat?
  • Does he in fact no longer take any medications for Parkinson’s?’

As the GREASE-SWEATING BEETUSBUCKET DUMBFUCK says, 

DENIALS REQUIRE PROOF!

Based on the Rules of Schmalfeldt, simply because I say so, all these things are true. The only way to disprove them is for DUMBFUCK – in true Alinsky style – to live up to his own rule book and provide sufficient proof to the negative.

And naturally I am the judge of sufficiency.

I’ll wait.

But only until 9 PM Eastern.

And you know, if anyone thinks of anything else he needs to provide denials for, leave a comment.

Like(10)Dislike(0)

Good Evening, DUMBFUCK!

How about you throw us a bone?

How are you doing in that doomed lawsuit the Hoge filed against you? Everything proceeding as you had foreseen?

Excellent! Glad to hear it. Keep up the great work, looks like this year’s LULZ harvest is going to set new records!!

Like(11)Dislike(0)

Got A Mouse In Your Pocket, DUMBFUCK?

By now YOU should be used to the idea that YOU will never, ever be taken seriously again.

It’s common knowledge that you have never kept your reality grounded in fact (more likely…poop).

And just as a matter of curiosity, why are many of my friends telling me that you are a “candidate” for a job at the same federal agency you “apparently” defrauded for a disability retirement in 2009?

I guess $9000 in life insurance doesn’t go as far as you thought, huh?

And the ScootyPuff (it’s red, vroom, VROOM!) ain’t got no resale value, I bet.

Like(9)Dislike(0)

Busy, Busy Birdies

The story you are about to read is true.  It is multiply-sourced and independently verified.

A while back, my good zombie pal Morgana posted this:

A reminder that since 2009, Bill Schmalfeldt has been unable to drive because, he says, Parkinson’s had so eroded his muscle control and executive function that he could not tell the accelerator from the brake pedal.  He decided that it would be a bad idea for society at large to allow Bill Schmalfeldt behind the wheel of an automobile.

Because Parkinson’s.

Continue reading “Busy, Busy Birdies”

Like(12)Dislike(0)

Hey, DUMBFUCK!

So when a DUMBFUCK talks about “threats to put me in jail,” does he mean like when he threatens people with jail for sending biohazardous material?

Or is he talking about his bogus charges for the “Forged Letter Caper” that he continuously accuses John Hoge of masterminding?

Or maybe the hundreds – thousands?  – of times he has promised that somebody was going to jail for perjury?

Perhaps he means the nine times he determined that someone was LYING!!!!!!!! in court to get a restraining order against him.

You know, that always goes so much better when you actually SLITHER OUT FROM UNDER YOUR SLIMY FUCKING ROCK and go to court. Take a note.


What interests me more is the fact that he calls that piece of crap a STORY and not an ARTICLE.

You see, articles appear in reputable publications and contain facts.

Stories, on the other hand, show up in disreputable rags like CabinBoy Unread, and contain nothing but unconfirmed bullshit.

And as our pal DUMBFUCK is so very fond of reminding us:

Sounds like the burden falls on the writer to prove, not on the subject to disprove. But I guess that rule only applies to other people.  You know, if a rule only applies for some people, sometimes, when it’s convenient, then it’s more of a suggestion than a rule, isn’t it?

And not even situationally ethical journalists like that soulless turdrolling, shitsniffing Cub Scout rapist (I have documentation, you know…just as authentic as yours, but I don’t even PRETEND to be a journalist…or ethical) we call DUMBFUCK have to follow suggestions, right?

Ahh…it’s okay, though.  All we have to do is write about…well, whatever we feel like writing about, whoever we feel like writing about.  Just follow the example set by our betters at SaveBrett’sBaconWhateverTheCost.com. If someone gives you a STORY…just assume it’s true. It’s a time-honored journalistic tradition, you know.

Sabrina Rubin Erdley will tell you how great it turns out…make ya famous.

Or just make it up, cuz that works too!

Ask Pulitzer Prize winner Janet Cooke.

Ask Stephen Glass.

Mike Barnicle.

Jayson Blair.

DUMBFUCK.


Oh, just one more thing…I don’t sound panicked, do I?  Because I sure don’t feel panicked.

Like(8)Dislike(0)