You can enter an appeal without placing a bond or any money (Rudy did) but then it does not 'stay' the collection of the money and the winner of the case can immediately get orders to walk over to your banks, clean out any cash, and begin the process of seizing and selling your property.
Trump just did, just that with E Jean $83MM case, as is being reported. He filed the appeal but provided no bond and thus there will be no stay.
And no there is nothing unjust about it.
Think of it this way. YOu are fighting with someone over a hundred dollar bill you both believe is yours. It is in your possession.
In court you lose, and they say it is the other persons. You plan to appeal., fine, but the current ruling is that it is HIS (not your) property. So he should be the one holding it in the appeal and not you, so you do not blow it, out of anger before the next case. It is HIS until ruled otherwise so he should hold it.
BUt the courts allow you to escrow it instead (post it as security or a bond instead) to ensure you do not pay it to the person, and then you win in the appeal and the other person has blown it all and cannot repay you.
So the ONLY FAIR and JUST thing to do is to make the person who lost put the entire amount in escrow to protect it. The second best thing, is to give it to the winner. Last would be letting the loser keep it as appeals play out over years as they have the highest motivation to then make sure it is all spent before handing it over.
It is a stupid question which is why you think it is great.
If any person who LOST and owed the person his last dollars, as Rudy Giuliani does, for example, and they know the appeal would last years, they have a super high motivation to just go blow every penny in vegas trying to win enough to pay the judgement or lose every penny and just declare the same bankruptcy they were going to have to file anyway.
If you know your last $x are going to the winner and you will end up broke after, but you have a few years before the money leaves you, you will try everything possible, to turn that money into more money, so you can pay the judgement and yet still have money left over. If you lose it all, you lose nothing, as you were going to have nothing if you did not try.
LIE.
No question remains and it has been asked and answered many, MANY times. You just ignore the answer and keep posing the same question as if unanswered.
Read the Judgement and you can answer them yourself if you want.
Stupidity and LIES.
Trump lost, so that money is not his in the courts eyes. It belongs to the other person.
You are passing along incorrect information. He is allowed to appeal, regardless.
Not all of them, some are just stupid or mentally ill.
You should read the final order issued by the judge, nothing was made up out of thin air.
What was unprecedented about it?
What two sets of rules? Others have been prosecuted in the exact same way as Trump was prosecuted. You just want Trump to get special treatment.
Untrue, he was found guilty in a quart of law.
They addressed the issues, it was the prosecutor who vowed to take Trump (a known criminal) down. This happens, but without a Trial and a judge finding that the law was broken... it would not have been possible. Checks and Balances. You just don't like the results or the facts that led to this verdict.
Really?
Won't happen, he is guilty as sin and the ruling will never be overturned. He might get some of it reduced but he will still have to pay one hell of a lot of money.
Are you actually claiming those are not true? Trump also said he would never pay this one but he has. He sure loses a lot.
Noone cares to read the bullshit you post.
Get used to it because Trump has pretty much destroyed the Republican party. He won't be elected as it is now and throw a few felony convictions on there and this election will be like the Reagan Mondale one.
You need to try and accept fact. The fucker is guilty and he will be posting one way or another the money or there will be no appeal.