Quantcast
Don't Miss
Home / Opinion Digests / Domestic Relations – Amendment To Answer – Equitable Distribution

No comments

  1. I became the appellee’s counsel a couple of months after the appellant noted her appeal. Two things about this opinion concern me, both relating to the posting of bond for the appeal:
    1. It would be nice if the court checked its record to see when a new counsel entered a case, so it doesn’t make annoying and misleading statements such as: “Counsel for the appellee failed to object in a timely fashion” regarding the bond. 2. This case implicitly appears to overrule Adams v. Adams, Nos. 0064-84 and 0347-85 (1986), which states that failure to post the appeal bond cannot be cured within the 21 day rule (Rule 5A:17), because the rule only applies to defects, not to situations where there is no bond at all. In the instand case, counsel for the appellant simply sent in a $500 check to the trial court with a cover letter that said ‘Please find enclosed my appeal bond’ with no bond paperwork whatsoever. That means a check was lodged with the court, not a bond, and the bond paperwork obviously does not appear in the record of the case. I know the bond paperwork is a big pain, and would actually prefer if the rules called for simply mailing in a check and saying ‘this is the bond’, but that is not what the rules provide for. Either enforce the rule, or dispense with it!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Scroll To Top