Edge v. Harsha, 67891
| Decision Date | 15 June 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 67891,67891 |
| Citation | 334 N.W.2d 741 |
| Parties | John F. EDGE and Ronald Friedman, Appellees, v. David George HARSHA, Mrs. David George Harsha, Baxter Feed Center, Inc., and the Unknown Heirs, Assignees, Representatives, or Successors of Them, Appellants. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Frank G. Wieslander, P.C., Altoona, for appellants.
Bruce J. Nuzum of Matthias, Tyler, Nuzum & Feuerhelm, Newton, for appellees.
Considered by UHLENHOPP, P.J., and HARRIS, McCORMICK, LARSON, and CARTER, JJ.
Can a district court discharge a judgment lien against real estate when the judgment debtor furnishes a supersedeas bond pending appeal? We think the court holds no such power and hence reverse an order purporting to do so.
In May of 1976 defendant Harsha filed a lawsuit against the State Savings Bank and J.G. Edge (individually and as an officer of the bank). The merits of the original suit are not important here. After a jury trial a sizable judgment was entered against Edge and the bank and it was duly recorded in the county clerk's judgment lien index. Edge and the bank appealed to this court and filed a corporate supersedeas bond to prevent Harsha from executing on the judgment pending appeal. We have yet to consider the appeal in the original case.
Plaintiffs here are the son and son-in-law of J.G. Edge. The two present plaintiffs claim they are the equitable owners of real estate in Jasper County even though legal title is held by J.G. Edge. They assert J.G. Edge conveyed the property to them but retained title "in order to facilitate financing." Plaintiffs contend the personal judgment entered in the first action against J.G. Edge should not constitute a lien against this real estate. They argue that a corporate supersedeas bond, filed by J.G. Edge, fully secured the defendant's judgment.
Because of the posting of the supersedeas bond the trial court determined defendants were "fully protected by [the] corporate surety supersedeas bond ..." and ordered the judgment lien lifted from the property. We granted an interlocutory appeal from that ruling. We are not now faced with the underlying merits of the case (whether J.G. Edge holds the land as trustee) but only with the propriety of the order lifting the judgment lien.
The parties present arguments on the adequacy of the protection of the supersedeas bond. The plaintiffs point out that the defendants, if successful on appeal, can look to the assets of the corporate surety, J.G. Edge, and the bank. Plaintiffs also point out that defendants may ask the clerk to review the bond's sufficiency under Iowa R.App. P. 8. Defendants argue that the corporate surety might go bankrupt or might decline to pay for any number of reasons. Defendants express concern that a judgment debtor, after posting a supersedeas bond, might be able to part with his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Aune v. B-Y Water Dist.
...to purchase a judgment against itself during the pendency of an appeal of the judgment. The same is true with regard to Edge v. Harsha, 334 N.W.2d 741 (Iowa 1983). The issue in Edge was whether a judgment lien against real property could be discharged where the judgment debtor furnished a s......
-
Iowa State Bank & Trust Co. v. Michel
...guarantees payment of and is available to satisfy only a judgment that is "appealed from" and "affirmed." See generally Edge v. Harsha, 334 N.W.2d 741, 742 (Iowa 1983) ("A supersedeas bond is a method of keeping creditors at bay to maintain the status quo until an appeal is The bank claims ......
-
Peoples Trust & Sav. Bank v. Sec. Sav. Bank
...of the judgment and garnishment. See Iowa State Bank & Trust Co. v. Michel, 683 N.W.2d 95, 101 (Iowa 2004) (citing Edge v. Harsha, 334 N.W.2d 741, 742 (Iowa 1983) ("A supersedeas bond is a method of keeping creditors at bay to maintain the status quo until an appeal is decided. It does not ......
-
Continental Cas. Co. v. Kinsey
...is to maintain the status quo and protect the judgment holder if the appeal is unsuccessful. See Rule 62(d), N.D.R.Civ.P.; Edge v. Harsha, 334 N.W.2d 741 (Iowa 1983). Kinsey has not demonstrated under what authority Continental had a duty to file a supersedeas bond. Nevertheless, assuming t......