Poplar Grove Planting & Refining Co. v. Bache Halsey Stuart, Inc.

Poplar Grove Planting & Refining Co. v. Bache Halsey Stuart, Inc.

Opinion

 [*1190]  Poplar Grove Planting and Refining Co., Inc. (Poplar Grove) was awarded an unconditional $ 270,985.65 judgement plus interest and costs against the defendant, Bache Halsey Stuart, Inc. (Bache) in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana. Bache filed with that court a timely notice of appeal. On Bache's ex parte motion to fix the amount of a supersedeas bond in order to stay enforcement of the final judgment pending disposition on appeal, the court fixed a $ 10,000 bond as the total security required for supersedeas (Fed.R.Civ.P. 62(d)) and costs. (F.R.A.P. 7). Upon filing of the $ 10,000 bond by Bache, the court stayed execution of the judgment pending disposition of the appeal.

Poplar Grove took issue with the court's summary determination and immediately moved in the district court to increase the amount of the supersedeas bond.  [**2]  In denying the motion, the district court reasoned only that "no useful purpose would be served by increasing the amount of the supersedeas bond." The order was appealed to this court which, unable to divine the underlying reasons for limiting plaintiff's bond protection, remanded with directions "for the limited purpose of enabling that court to explicate the basis upon which its actions were predicated, with directions to embody the statement of its reasoning in a supplemental order which shall be filed with this court as promptly as reasonably possible."

Rather than supplying information which would facilitate meaningful review of its exercise of discretion, the court responded:

It is difficult to state reasons for the setting of the $ 10,000 bond other than to say the court thought then and thinks now it is sufficient.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.