That is so stupidly absurd, interest should not even be considered for legal matters because the government is not supposed to use it as a way to generate income.
It's interesting to me that the state as the plaintiff doesn't need to prove standing for the civil case. After all, nothing alleged in the lawsuit identified the state as an injured party in any way. And the entities that could have claimed injury all said they were not injured. Where was the standing?
Well we know that standing is just a tool of convenience in cases like these, so I guess the state doesn't bother proving standing, but gives the judge a wink and a nod so the case goes forward.
Why does a $464M bond require $557M in cash?
Why is the price rising?
Make it make sense from a legal standpoint.
When you appeal, you have to put up 120% of the judgment to stay the enforcement. This is to cover additional interest.
Because you are asking the judge to delay the payment as you appeal.
That is so stupidly absurd, interest should not even be considered for legal matters because the government is not supposed to use it as a way to generate income.
Well this was a civil lawsuit
So if I wronged you and owed you $500,000 in a court judgement. I would also owe interest if I delayed paying you, even if it was due to appeal.
The state being the plaintiff makes it less obvious.
It's interesting to me that the state as the plaintiff doesn't need to prove standing for the civil case. After all, nothing alleged in the lawsuit identified the state as an injured party in any way. And the entities that could have claimed injury all said they were not injured. Where was the standing?
Well we know that standing is just a tool of convenience in cases like these, so I guess the state doesn't bother proving standing, but gives the judge a wink and a nod so the case goes forward.