Yeah, I don't know why anyone would be surprised. It was obvious he was just waiting. I also don't know why they'd think this is a win or that if he hadn't, they'd have been able to seize assets.
that if he hadn't, they'd have been able to seize assets.
Because that's how the law works.
If you have a judgement against you, you have an automatic 30 day "stay" of the judgement. Then to get a further stay, you need to put up the money or get a bond company to put up the money.
If you sued me and were awarded 1 million dollar judgement, I would have to put 1 million into an escrow account. If I didn't you have the right to execute the judgement and collect the money. As the judgement creditor you could ask the sheriff or a marshall to seize my assets
You get to take the amount of the judgement. Not everything. Unless the assets can't cover it.
If I owed you a judgement of 1 million dollars. And I had 500 grand in the bank and a car collection worth 5 million.
If I didn't pay the bond while I appealed you would have the right to execute the judgement once 30 days passed
You could seize my bank account and my cars. I couldn't stop you. After the cash I would owe you 500,000 grand.
The sheriff could start auctioning off my cars. Let's say 5 cars brought in 522,000. You would get the rest of your money and I would get 22 grand and the rest of my cars.
Seizing assets and auctioning them go through the courts and legal orders and it's not a quick thing.
I have been suspicious of you since you were a handshake.
You are being dishonest, and that makes me more suspicious.
You know people were arguing this, you know that was the outcome that they wanted, because they thought they'd be able to break him like that.
They run across Twitter and Reddit, giddy at the thought and it is strictly dishonest to pretend it wasn't happening.
Additionally, asset seizures are already dubious when it comes to the Constitutional rights of the people -- and I do not care what state law you attempt to quote that clashes with the Constitution, as there are many attempts to do just that, and you -- apparently -- would eat that up, defend it and proclaim everyone else is wrong.
Yeah, I don't know why anyone would be surprised. It was obvious he was just waiting. I also don't know why they'd think this is a win or that if he hadn't, they'd have been able to seize assets.
Because that's how the law works.
If you have a judgement against you, you have an automatic 30 day "stay" of the judgement. Then to get a further stay, you need to put up the money or get a bond company to put up the money.
If you sued me and were awarded 1 million dollar judgement, I would have to put 1 million into an escrow account. If I didn't you have the right to execute the judgement and collect the money. As the judgement creditor you could ask the sheriff or a marshall to seize my assets
https://www.nycourts.gov/courts/nyc/smallclaims/collectingjudgment.shtml
You do not get to take everything he's worth just because he didn't post it, and that's what they mean.
You know it, I know it. Don't pretend otherwise.
I don't know what you mean.
I don't think anyone was actually arguing this.
You get to take the amount of the judgement. Not everything. Unless the assets can't cover it.
If I owed you a judgement of 1 million dollars. And I had 500 grand in the bank and a car collection worth 5 million.
If I didn't pay the bond while I appealed you would have the right to execute the judgement once 30 days passed
You could seize my bank account and my cars. I couldn't stop you. After the cash I would owe you 500,000 grand.
The sheriff could start auctioning off my cars. Let's say 5 cars brought in 522,000. You would get the rest of your money and I would get 22 grand and the rest of my cars.
Seizing assets and auctioning them go through the courts and legal orders and it's not a quick thing.
But read the link I posted, that's the process.
I have been suspicious of you since you were a handshake.
You are being dishonest, and that makes me more suspicious.
You know people were arguing this, you know that was the outcome that they wanted, because they thought they'd be able to break him like that.
They run across Twitter and Reddit, giddy at the thought and it is strictly dishonest to pretend it wasn't happening.
Additionally, asset seizures are already dubious when it comes to the Constitutional rights of the people -- and I do not care what state law you attempt to quote that clashes with the Constitution, as there are many attempts to do just that, and you -- apparently -- would eat that up, defend it and proclaim everyone else is wrong.