Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Service Temps, Inc.
782 F. Supp. 2d 288
N.D. Tex.2011Background
- EEOC sued Smith for violating the ADA; amended judgment awarded backpay, compensatory and punitive damages after remittitur; Smith appeals seeking a supersedeas bond amount under Texas law; EEOC contends Rule 62.1 governs bond amount in this court and Rule 62(f) does not apply Texas law; court must determine whether amended judgment is a lien under Texas law to apply Rule 62(f); court surveys Texas lien creation requirements and related state-law protections (52.001–52.003, 52.0011, 52.0012) and related Texas-case law; court concludes Texas lien mechanics are not satisfied here; thus Rule 62(f) does not apply and bond is governed by ND Tex Civ. R. 62.1; motion to reduce bond denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 62(f) governs supersedeas bond here | EEOC says Rule 62(f) controls as the stay framework. | Smith argues Texas law governs security, invoking Rule 62(f). | Rule 62(f) does not apply; not a lien under Texas law. |
| Whether the amended judgment is a lien on the debtor's property under Texas law | If lien, Texas law dictates bond scope. | Lien creation requires a technically compliant abstract and other steps under Texas law. | Amended judgment is not a lien under Texas law. |
| If not a lien, what governs the supersedeas bond amount | ND Tex Civ. R. 62.1 controls bond amount. | Texas lien analysis would alter the rule.” | Bond amount controlled by ND Tex Civ. R. 62.1. |
| What is the required bond amount under Rule 62.1 given the judgments awarded | Security equals judgment plus interest and delay damages plus costs. | Bond should be that amount per Rule 62.1, possibly reduced if lien rule applied. | Smith must post the ND Tex 62.1 amount (judgment + 20% interest/delay + $250) in addition to existing totals; motion denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Castillo v. Montelepre, Inc., 999 F.2d 931 (5th Cir. 1993) (court discussed Rule 62(f) and security for appeal in Texas context)
- Enserch Corp. v. Shand Morahan & Co., 918 F.2d 462 (5th Cir. 1990) (interpreting Rule 62(d) as general rule with limited exceptions)
- Wilson v. Dvorak, 228 S.W.3d 228 (Tex.App.2007) (properly drafted abstract mandatory for lien creation under Texas law)