Using A Baltimore Injunction Bond to Your Benefit

November 30, 2017 by · Leave a Comment 

An injunction can be a messy situation without a Baltimore injunction bond. When taking legal action you want to make sure you are always covered. A Baltimore injunction bond does just that no matter what the injunction is for.

Reason for Court Surety Bonds

Maryland courts rely on surety bonds to cover the legal actions of both the plaintiff and defendant. While the judicial system strives to be fair it also admits that loopholes can be found, and wrongful actions can occur. A surety bond is an effort to prevent such situations.

By requiring the plaintiff or defendant to post a surety bond, the court can cover the other party should the action be harmful. A wage garnishment, for example, can be a harsh financial blow. And to grant that action with no concern to that fact would be wrong so courts step in with a surety bond requirement.

Baltimore Injunction Bond Requirements

A Baltimore injunction bond is a type of plaintiff bond. When a plaintiff seeks to stop the action of a defendant they ask for an injunction bond. An injunction can cover a wide range of situations from stopping a commercial from running to stopping construction on a roadway. A Baltimore injunction bond must cover the full value of the injunction. This means protecting the defendant against a financial loss.

To be accepted by the courts, the Baltimore injunction bond must also be set for the correct term limits. Surety bond experts can quickly tell clients which term limits apply to their situation. Failing to satisfy Baltimore injunction bond requirements can lead to further legal action and costs.

Other Types of Court Surety Bonds

Other types of Baltimore court surety bonds include appeal bonds, bid protest bonds, and release of lis pendens bonds. An appeal bond is the most commonly used across all states. A plaintiff may seek an appeal bond should they lose a case. A defendant can also seek an appeal bond if they lose a case. They can also stay a judgement which means they don’t have to pay a monetary judgement while the appeal process plays out.

The lawyer-trained staff at Jurisco helps clients understand which court surety bond is best for them. The surety bond experts know all the Baltimore court surety bond requirements for every type of bond.

Answers to Surety Bond Question

Do you have questions about a Baltimore injunction bond or surety bonds in general? Contact Jurisco to get answers to all your surety bond questions. The Maryland surety bond experts are ready to offer same-day professional service for every Baltimore surety bond client. Let Jurisco take care of the Baltimore injunction bond with the lowest surety bond rate possible.

Starbucks and Injunction Bonds in California

April 29, 2015 by · Leave a Comment 

Starbucks and Injunction Bonds in CaliforniaIn 2014 Starbucks filed suit in California seeking to have a preliminary Injunction levied against Howard Heller, the owner of both Specialty Coffees International and Cafe Nu International, for (among other claims) trademark infringement. (Details of the case can be found: here) The defendant failed to answer the complaint and the judge granted the preliminary injunction to the plaintiff in November of 2014.   In a world gone fully digitized, ‘intellectual property’ is growing harder to define and it is becoming more difficult to recognize (and then prove) if your intellectual property is being infringed on or stolen.   The law offers a few ways to protect a company’s brands and intellectual property.  Certainly one of the most potent tools is the use of preliminary injunctive relief (yes, that is an actual term:  proof), where a plaintiff can stop the misappropriation of physical or digital goods from being sold in the market place.  In most cases, courts in California will insist that an Injunction Bond be procured before any per-judgement relief is levied.

An injunction bond protects the defendant from being wrongfully enjoined, and covers any damages the defendant may sustain should the court rule the plaintiff’s suit is wrongful.  In the example used above, Starbucks was granted the preliminary injunction based on the merits of the claim.  However, if the court eventually sides with the defendant, then Starbucks would be liable to pay for the harm the defendants suffered because their goods were prevented from being sold.  Generally,  judges in California do not issue injunctions unless the claim seems airtight and likely to be upheld.  Or, in the language of the court, “Starbucks has demonstrated that it will likely suffer irreparable harm if an injunction is not issued”.  For all pre-judgement actions, the burden of proof is with the plaintiff and they must prove that they will suffer harm, rather than inflict it on the defendant through enjoinment.

INJUNCTION BONDS
Jurisco is the leader in injunction and all plaintiff court bonds.  There are many agents and agencies in the marketplace who do not understand the product they are selling and rely on the insurance companies to underwrite their bonds.  At Jurisco, they know the risks and how to effectively underwrite all court bonds
without the necessity of going back and forth with corporate “no” men underwriters.  Most companies require collateral for ALL injunction bonds.  While there are a few injunction cases that may need collateral, Jurisco strives to approve every bond without this requirement so the filing can move forward quickly and without
delay. For application, rates and more information on Injunction Bonds, contact the surety bond experts at Jurisco, and one of their knowledgeable staff will answer all your queries.

 
Call +1 (800) 274-2663 for Fast & Reliable Service Nationwide on all Surety Bonds GET A QUOTE