¶2The effect of the Court's order is to secure the judgment creditors twice. It is undisputed that Merrill Lynch, on order of Leon C. Baker, transferred title to Leon C. Baker's securities to an account in the name of the judgment creditors' attorneys, in the amount of $724,353.33. Merrill Lynch requested that it be allowed to interplead the $750,000 required by this Court, to be posted as a supersedeas bond, and to use the $724,353.33 transferred to the account of the Bennetts' attorneys as part of the $750,000. It seems to me that the Bennetts, if they win on appeal, would be protected by such an arrangement. To require Baker to post a supersedeas bond in the amount of $750,000, when $724,353.33 worth of Baker's assets have already been transferred to an account in the name of the Bennetts' attorneys, I *984 believe, is legally incorrect. This seems especially so in light of the fact that Baker's, arguments on the appeal appear to have some merit.
660 So. 2d 980
Baker v. Bennett
Decided March 3, 1995
Supreme Court of Alabama · decided 1995-03-03
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1995-03-03
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently November 2017
6 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →