Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Citation
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Parent Document
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 1992-03-24
Other Sections in This Document (47)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
- Nickles v. Auntie Margaret Daycare, Corp., 829 S.W.2d 614 (1992)
Full Text
648 charsAuntie Margaret argues that because the trial court awarded lessors no damages, “there was no amount of judgment left unsatisfied” and “the trial court could reasonably find that a $500.00 bond was adequate to protect [lessors’] cost.” Auntie Margaret’s argument ignores the fact that the stay of execution pending appeal permitted the corporation to remain in possession of the premises without payment of rent, insurance, and property taxes. Thus, under Rule 81.09(b) and § 535.110, the bond was insufficient to protect lessors’ interest in the event the judgment voiding the lease and returning possession to lessors was affirmed on appeal. *619