Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Lindsey v. Normet, 405 U.S. 56 (1972)

Citation
Lindsey v. Normet, 405 U.S. 56 (1972)
Parent Document
Lindsey v. Normet, 405 U.S. 56 (1972)

Other Sections in This Document (148)

Full Text

643 chars
'Inasmuch as a final judgment for restitution could not include a judgment for rent pending appeal it appears obvious that the legislative purpose for requiring this particular bond on appeal was to guarantee that the rent pending an appeal would be paid. That the bond must provide for double the rental value was, no doubt, intended to prevent frivolous appeals for the purpose of delay. If there were not some added cost or restriction every ousted tenant would appeal, regardless of the justification. It can also be assumed that the additional payment would compensate for waste or is in lieu of damages for the unlawful holding over.' 23